Coronavirus

[dice]

Looks like my younger brother is about to lose his job and he's concerned about losing his health insurance right now. Anyone have leads on online/remote jobs that might be worth applying for? Doesn't need to come with insurance as long as it pays enough for him to buy his own.

dunno about the job, unfortunately, but he can get discounted health insurance through the federal exchange or maintain his current coverage at full cost w/ COBRA (sounds like he would not want that). he might even qualify for free medicaid (federal application process will guide him on that) given that he is losing his job early in the year. this assumes he lives in illinois or another (probably blue) state where he would be eligible under the medicaid expansion provided by the ACA

https://www.healthcare.gov/quick-guide/dates-and-deadlines/

[dumbell78]

So we have our little boys (6 month old) baptism this coming Sunday, arranged over two months ago. This sucks but we're thinking of cancelling, the whole get together at church and afterwards. Were thinking at best just the immediate family go to church after the service do the baptism and head home. Had a lunch planned with the family, 35 ppl invited. Crazy how this has happened.

pretty tough to postpone a baptism, i would imagine

Yeah it nuts. I also feel very bad for the local restaurant we were using. We have it booked from 1-5 for his Sunday, I'll have to talk to them and possibly reschedule. We just don't know how long this will last.

[Payt10]

Hoping for the best is about as useful as “thoughts and prayers”.

Our country will survive. It will be painful for certain, but it will survive. What the country wouldn’t survive is a rush to get back to normalcy before having a handle on the virus. Doing so would would likely force businesses to close and citizens to quarantine, not in a preemptive attempt to stop a spread from getting out of control, but as a result of an out of control spreading of the virus.

People living paycheck to paycheck should of stopped tolerating things long long ago. It’s not as if political leadership has had their best interests in mind when bailing out banks, cutting social welfare programs, passing tax cuts to corporate interests and wealthy donors....

This virus sucks, the pain it will cause physically, emotionally, and financially sucks... that said, it is really shining a spot light on the vulnerabilities, faults, and the inequities of the systems this country and its citizens rely on for survival.

Trying to stop a flu virus from spreading is like trying to control the wind. It's not going to happen. These lockdowns are fine in the short term, but they won't survive all the way through August without potentially even more serious repercussions on the American people.

If you lived in an area where the wind whipped off the mountains and blew rocks and debris into your windows, would you not shudder your windows until you can build a windbreak?

This is no different. Society needs to slow the damage until they can find the solution.

This isn’t the flu...

But the flu for example, may not get stopped, but it gets managed through vaccines.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is bad, needs to pay attention to Trump. The guy would be happy to say “ignore the fake news and the do nothing Democrat’s, they are just trying to destroy my totally successful administration and historic economy to steal an election”... but he’s not saying that now because even he sees he can’t continue to downplay the threat.

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure. That's not a thing that can happen without hundreds of millions of people's livelihoods being at stake. The virus looks like it could be pretty bad, but a great depression would be even worse. That's why (some of) these measures can't last for months on end without suffering even more major consequences. There is always a threshold.

[Ccwatercraft]

The thing is there's no simple answer to this problem and perhaps no complex answer to it either. The standard of living for people living paycheck to paycheck has probably never been higher, and there have always been times where that is true. Unless you create a system where basic needs can be provided to every person then you will always have this issue.

People put themselves in this position. There is a view that every person should be able to live independently and move out of their house and support themselves. That may not be a realistic and sustainable goal for our society if you don't want people living paycheck to paycheck. Blaming the wealthy won't actually fix this problem. People make poor financial decisions.

That's not to say wealth distribution isn't a valid problem. I think it is, as do I think think the ever increasing amount of wealth moving towards capital providers rather than laborers, but even if you had a better distribution of wealth, you wouldn't remove these problems you're talking about where people are just forever willing to overextend themselves and then look for help from somewhere else.

You are right...once something is free, the tendency is too look for it instead of working for it. But, if health care is made easier as the first step, that will give a guideline for other things. And, basic food items should be affordable for everyone. That is better distribution of wealth or socialism but it provides a path for study.

There is a fine balance between getting rich through hard work/innovation and getting rich based on monopoly, corporate connections. The system has to differentiate between those two and not let the second group become the majority rich which is what it seems to be happening.

i've long held the position that there should be a balance between the freedom of the individual to achieve/innovate and the needs of society. as such, unsurprisingly to me, the happiest societies are the ones where total taxation is around 50%

world happiness report will be released on friday, but using last year's rankings:

1 finland ($48,580 per capita GNI, 54.2% total tax rate)
2 denmark ($56,410, 50.8%)
3 norway ($68,310, 54.8%)
4 iceland ($67,050, 40.4%)
5 netherlands ($56,890, 39.8%)
6 switzerland ($68,820, 27.8%)
7 sweden ($54,030, 49.8%)
8 new zealand ($39,410, 34.5%)
9 canada ($47,590, 31.7%)
10 austria ($55,300, 42.7%)
11 australia ($50,050, 27.8%)
12 costa rica ($16,700, 21.0%)
13 israel ($39,940, 36.8%)
14 luxembourg ($72.200, 36.5%)
15 UK ($45,350, 34.4%)
16 ireland ($67,050, 30.8%)
17 germany ($54,560, 44.5%)
18 belgium ($51,740, 47.9%)
19 USA ($63,690, 27.1%)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio

and so the question becomes, how best to utilize government funds. i personally believe that broad-based government health care should be available for all citizens at low out-of-pocket cost (co-pays only - to avoid having hypochondriacs abuse the system). something that every industrialized nation other than the USA has. i also believe in quality free public education. to what age/level that goes i'm not sure. i also believe in the concept of a universal basic income (UBI), which i came up with independently about 20 years ago, not realizing that it was a fairly widely discussed topic already:

-concept dates back to 16th century
-advocated by "father of the american revolution" thomas paine
-widely discussed as "state bonus" in early 1900s
-we've had one for the elderly in the form of social security since 1935
-family allowances implemented in UK in 1946
-"negative income tax" experiments in canada and US in '60s and '70s - nixon proposed one
-alaska has had a "permanent fund dividend" for all residents funded by state oil revenues since 1976 ($1-2K a year to all permanent residents)
-broadly discussed in europe since the '80s

my basic vision is a 50% flat income tax w/ no other forms of taxation (no business tax, no sales tax, no property tax, no...parking tickets/fees!). whatever money the government does not spend gets rebated to all independent citizens (w/ a fractional share for dependents, to be distributed to their caretakers). government expenses itemized and distributed along w/ rebate checks. incentivizes lawmakers to limit government expenditures. based on the USA GNI of $63,690 and assuming that the government uses 40% of its 50% tax revenue, that would leave $6,369 per citizen (around $7300 per adult and $3650 per dependent if doing a 2:1 ratio) to be distributed annually in the form of a UBI

give congress $1 they will spend $1.10

[dice]

Trying to stop a flu virus from spreading is like trying to control the wind. It's not going to happen. These lockdowns are fine in the short term, but they won't survive all the way through August without potentially even more serious repercussions on the American people.

If you lived in an area where the wind whipped off the mountains and blew rocks and debris into your windows, would you not shudder your windows until you can build a windbreak?

This is no different. Society needs to slow the damage until they can find the solution.

This isn’t the flu...

But the flu for example, may not get stopped, but it gets managed through vaccines.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is bad, needs to pay attention to Trump. The guy would be happy to say “ignore the fake news and the do nothing Democrat’s, they are just trying to destroy my totally successful administration and historic economy to steal an election”... but he’s not saying that now because even he sees he can’t continue to downplay the threat.

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure.

nobody is proposing that. what we're trying as a society to accomplish right now is to stretch this out long enough so that hospitals can get back under capacity. as soon as that happens we can reasonably move back toward normalcy. unfortunately, we're above the dotted line right now:



the most reasonable alternative is expanding hospital capacity, which would require federal action to do on any meaningful scale (army corps of engineers)

hospital beds per 1000 people (2016):

13 japan
12 s korea (doing an excellent job w/ coronavirus)

8 russia, germany
7 austria, hungary, lithuania, czechs, poland
6 france, slovakia, belgium, latvia
5 luxembourg, estonia, switzerland
4 slovenia, greece, china, finland, australia, norway
3 netherlands, portugal, italy (3.17), iceland, israel, spain, ireland, USA (2.77), turkey, new zealand, denmark, canada, UK
2 sweden, chile, colombia
1 mexico

[dice]

You are right...once something is free, the tendency is too look for it instead of working for it. But, if health care is made easier as the first step, that will give a guideline for other things. And, basic food items should be affordable for everyone. That is better distribution of wealth or socialism but it provides a path for study.

There is a fine balance between getting rich through hard work/innovation and getting rich based on monopoly, corporate connections. The system has to differentiate between those two and not let the second group become the majority rich which is what it seems to be happening.

i've long held the position that there should be a balance between the freedom of the individual to achieve/innovate and the needs of society. as such, unsurprisingly to me, the happiest societies are the ones where total taxation is around 50%

world happiness report will be released on friday, but using last year's rankings:

1 finland ($48,580 per capita GNI, 54.2% total tax rate)
2 denmark ($56,410, 50.8%)
3 norway ($68,310, 54.8%)
4 iceland ($67,050, 40.4%)
5 netherlands ($56,890, 39.8%)
6 switzerland ($68,820, 27.8%)
7 sweden ($54,030, 49.8%)
8 new zealand ($39,410, 34.5%)
9 canada ($47,590, 31.7%)
10 austria ($55,300, 42.7%)
11 australia ($50,050, 27.8%)
12 costa rica ($16,700, 21.0%)
13 israel ($39,940, 36.8%)
14 luxembourg ($72.200, 36.5%)
15 UK ($45,350, 34.4%)
16 ireland ($67,050, 30.8%)
17 germany ($54,560, 44.5%)
18 belgium ($51,740, 47.9%)
19 USA ($63,690, 27.1%)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio

and so the question becomes, how best to utilize government funds. i personally believe that broad-based government health care should be available for all citizens at low out-of-pocket cost (co-pays only - to avoid having hypochondriacs abuse the system). something that every industrialized nation other than the USA has. i also believe in quality free public education. to what age/level that goes i'm not sure. i also believe in the concept of a universal basic income (UBI), which i came up with independently about 20 years ago, not realizing that it was a fairly widely discussed topic already:

-concept dates back to 16th century
-advocated by "father of the american revolution" thomas paine
-widely discussed as "state bonus" in early 1900s
-we've had one for the elderly in the form of social security since 1935
-family allowances implemented in UK in 1946
-"negative income tax" experiments in canada and US in '60s and '70s - nixon proposed one
-alaska has had a "permanent fund dividend" for all residents funded by state oil revenues since 1976 ($1-2K a year to all permanent residents)
-broadly discussed in europe since the '80s

my basic vision is a 50% flat income tax w/ no other forms of taxation (no business tax, no sales tax, no property tax, no...parking tickets/fees!). whatever money the government does not spend gets rebated to all independent citizens (w/ a fractional share for dependents, to be distributed to their caretakers). government expenses itemized and distributed along w/ rebate checks. incentivizes lawmakers to limit government expenditures. based on the USA GNI of $63,690 and assuming that the government uses 40% of its 50% tax revenue, that would leave $6,369 per citizen (around $7300 per adult and $3650 per dependent if doing a 2:1 ratio) to be distributed annually in the form of a UBI

give congress $1 they will spend $1.10

hasn't always been the case and would be even less so if you're giving the american people frequent updates on what's happening with their money alongside their fluctuating government paychecks!

one of the reasons the US government tends to spend more than it takes in is that it doesn't take in much relative to other nations

[Chi town]

Trying to stop a flu virus from spreading is like trying to control the wind. It's not going to happen. These lockdowns are fine in the short term, but they won't survive all the way through August without potentially even more serious repercussions on the American people.

If you lived in an area where the wind whipped off the mountains and blew rocks and debris into your windows, would you not shudder your windows until you can build a windbreak?

This is no different. Society needs to slow the damage until they can find the solution.

This isn’t the flu...

But the flu for example, may not get stopped, but it gets managed through vaccines.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is bad, needs to pay attention to Trump. The guy would be happy to say “ignore the fake news and the do nothing Democrat’s, they are just trying to destroy my totally successful administration and historic economy to steal an election”... but he’s not saying that now because even he sees he can’t continue to downplay the threat.

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure. That's not a thing that can happen without hundreds of millions of people's livelihoods being at stake. The virus looks like it could be pretty bad, but a great depression would be even worse. That's why (some of) these measures can't last for months on end without suffering even more major consequences. There is always a threshold.

We are full home lockdown here in SF as of midnight tonight.

I think the threshold as is will be about 3-4 weeks.

[Payt10]

If you lived in an area where the wind whipped off the mountains and blew rocks and debris into your windows, would you not shudder your windows until you can build a windbreak?

This is no different. Society needs to slow the damage until they can find the solution.

This isn’t the flu...

But the flu for example, may not get stopped, but it gets managed through vaccines.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is bad, needs to pay attention to Trump. The guy would be happy to say “ignore the fake news and the do nothing Democrat’s, they are just trying to destroy my totally successful administration and historic economy to steal an election”... but he’s not saying that now because even he sees he can’t continue to downplay the threat.

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure.

nobody is proposing that. what we're trying as a society to accomplish right now is to stretch this out long enough so that hospitals can get back under capacity. as soon as that happens we can reasonably move back toward normalcy. unfortunately, we're above the dotted line right now:



the most reasonable alternative is expanding hospital capacity, which would require federal action to do on any meaningful scale (army corps of engineers)

hospital beds per 1000 people (2016):

13 japan
12 s korea (doing an excellent job w/ coronavirus)

8 russia, germany
7 austria, hungary, lithuania, czechs, poland
6 france, slovakia, belgium, latvia
5 luxembourg, estonia, switzerland
4 slovenia, greece, china, finland, australia, norway
3 netherlands, portugal, italy (3.17), iceland, israel, spain, ireland, USA (2.77), turkey, new zealand, denmark, canada, UK
2 sweden, chile, colombia
1 mexico

Yes, I know, I understand the flattening of the curve strategy. It makes sense, but you also have to understand that eventually it's going to come at a severe cost that could impact millions of lives by shutting down the economy. At what point that will happen, I'm not sure, but it will become inevitable the longer these restrictions last. It's only been a week and things are falling off the cliff.

[dice]

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure.

nobody is proposing that. what we're trying as a society to accomplish right now is to stretch this out long enough so that hospitals can get back under capacity. as soon as that happens we can reasonably move back toward normalcy. unfortunately, we're above the dotted line right now:



the most reasonable alternative is expanding hospital capacity, which would require federal action to do on any meaningful scale (army corps of engineers)

hospital beds per 1000 people (2016):

13 japan
12 s korea (doing an excellent job w/ coronavirus)

8 russia, germany
7 austria, hungary, lithuania, czechs, poland
6 france, slovakia, belgium, latvia
5 luxembourg, estonia, switzerland
4 slovenia, greece, china, finland, australia, norway
3 netherlands, portugal, italy (3.17), iceland, israel, spain, ireland, USA (2.77), turkey, new zealand, denmark, canada, UK
2 sweden, chile, colombia
1 mexico

Yes, I know, I understand the flattening of the curve strategy. It makes sense, but you also have to understand that eventually it's going to come at a severe cost that could impact millions of lives by shutting down the economy. At what point that will happen, I'm not sure, but it will become inevitable the longer these restrictions last. It's only been a week and things are falling off the cliff.

what is the cost of having companies lose employees (either sick leave or, god forbid, death)? business was going to enter a slowdown period because of this anyway. people were going to lose their jobs. the short-term will be worse due to preventative measures, but the idea is to AVOID long-term severe cost. both to human health and the economy

FAILING to flatten the curve is what necessitates more drastic measures. we have thus far failed as a nation to flatten the curve and are suffering the consequences. both humans and businesses are in a triage situation

[Ccwatercraft]

i've long held the position that there should be a balance between the freedom of the individual to achieve/innovate and the needs of society. as such, unsurprisingly to me, the happiest societies are the ones where total taxation is around 50%

world happiness report will be released on friday, but using last year's rankings:

1 finland ($48,580 per capita GNI, 54.2% total tax rate)
2 denmark ($56,410, 50.8%)
3 norway ($68,310, 54.8%)
4 iceland ($67,050, 40.4%)
5 netherlands ($56,890, 39.8%)
6 switzerland ($68,820, 27.8%)
7 sweden ($54,030, 49.8%)
8 new zealand ($39,410, 34.5%)
9 canada ($47,590, 31.7%)
10 austria ($55,300, 42.7%)
11 australia ($50,050, 27.8%)
12 costa rica ($16,700, 21.0%)
13 israel ($39,940, 36.8%)
14 luxembourg ($72.200, 36.5%)
15 UK ($45,350, 34.4%)
16 ireland ($67,050, 30.8%)
17 germany ($54,560, 44.5%)
18 belgium ($51,740, 47.9%)
19 USA ($63,690, 27.1%)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio

and so the question becomes, how best to utilize government funds. i personally believe that broad-based government health care should be available for all citizens at low out-of-pocket cost (co-pays only - to avoid having hypochondriacs abuse the system). something that every industrialized nation other than the USA has. i also believe in quality free public education. to what age/level that goes i'm not sure. i also believe in the concept of a universal basic income (UBI), which i came up with independently about 20 years ago, not realizing that it was a fairly widely discussed topic already:

-concept dates back to 16th century
-advocated by "father of the american revolution" thomas paine
-widely discussed as "state bonus" in early 1900s
-we've had one for the elderly in the form of social security since 1935
-family allowances implemented in UK in 1946
-"negative income tax" experiments in canada and US in '60s and '70s - nixon proposed one
-alaska has had a "permanent fund dividend" for all residents funded by state oil revenues since 1976 ($1-2K a year to all permanent residents)
-broadly discussed in europe since the '80s

my basic vision is a 50% flat income tax w/ no other forms of taxation (no business tax, no sales tax, no property tax, no...parking tickets/fees!). whatever money the government does not spend gets rebated to all independent citizens (w/ a fractional share for dependents, to be distributed to their caretakers). government expenses itemized and distributed along w/ rebate checks. incentivizes lawmakers to limit government expenditures. based on the USA GNI of $63,690 and assuming that the government uses 40% of its 50% tax revenue, that would leave $6,369 per citizen (around $7300 per adult and $3650 per dependent if doing a 2:1 ratio) to be distributed annually in the form of a UBI

give congress $1 they will spend $1.10

hasn't always been the case and would be even less so if you're giving the american people frequent updates on what's happening with their money alongside their fluctuating government paychecks!

one of the reasons the US government tends to spend more than it takes in is that it doesn't take in much relative to other nations

hard pass.

[dice]

give congress $1 they will spend $1.10

hasn't always been the case and would be even less so if you're giving the american people frequent updates on what's happening with their money alongside their fluctuating government paychecks!

one of the reasons the US government tends to spend more than it takes in is that it doesn't take in much relative to other nations

hard pass.

that's a hard pass on the emotional well-being of americans, i'm afraid

[MrSparkle]

hasn't always been the case and would be even less so if you're giving the american people frequent updates on what's happening with their money alongside their fluctuating government paychecks!

one of the reasons the US government tends to spend more than it takes in is that it doesn't take in much relative to other nations

hard pass.

that's a hard pass on the emotional well-being of americans, i'm afraid

The fragility of the US system in general is being majorly exposed right now. We'll see where it goes from here.

[dice]

welp, they just closed my gym for at least the next couple of weeks. seems unnecessary to me. not sure it's even an effective anti-coronavirus measure given that exercise helps the immune system

[drosereturn]

If you lived in an area where the wind whipped off the mountains and blew rocks and debris into your windows, would you not shudder your windows until you can build a windbreak?

This is no different. Society needs to slow the damage until they can find the solution.

This isn’t the flu...

But the flu for example, may not get stopped, but it gets managed through vaccines.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is bad, needs to pay attention to Trump. The guy would be happy to say “ignore the fake news and the do nothing Democrat’s, they are just trying to destroy my totally successful administration and historic economy to steal an election”... but he’s not saying that now because even he sees he can’t continue to downplay the threat.

You're not getting it. You can't keep people from working for as long as it takes to find a cure.

nobody is proposing that. what we're trying as a society to accomplish right now is to stretch this out long enough so that hospitals can get back under capacity. as soon as that happens we can reasonably move back toward normalcy. unfortunately, we're above the dotted line right now:



the most reasonable alternative is expanding hospital capacity, which would require federal action to do on any meaningful scale (army corps of engineers)

hospital beds per 1000 people (2016):

13 japan
12 s korea (doing an excellent job w/ coronavirus)

8 russia, germany
7 austria, hungary, lithuania, czechs, poland
6 france, slovakia, belgium, latvia
5 luxembourg, estonia, switzerland
4 slovenia, greece, china, finland, australia, norway
3 netherlands, portugal, italy (3.17), iceland, israel, spain, ireland, USA (2.77), turkey, new zealand, denmark, canada, UK
2 sweden, chile, colombia
1 mexico

I am expecting a lot of people to die in America. Looks like situation like these are why being an American isnt as good.
Even Japan and Korea dont have enought beds now that infection might go into tens of thousands.
Imagine if millions get infected in America due to large population size. The entire country could go something like great depression.

[League Circles]

welp, they just closed my gym for at least the next couple of weeks. seems unnecessary to me. not sure it's even an effective anti-coronavirus measure given that exercise helps the immune system

Smh. Dude, don't be ridiculous. Of course it's an unnecessary risk. You can very easily get adequate exercise away from a gym.

[ImSlower]

Well i am unemployed for awhile. My little Italian joint I work at is going to suffer. We can't do curbside, too much cost. So now after work we are all getting quite drunk and cooking up ourselves a hell pf a feast. So hey its the little things.

[League Circles]

Well i am unemployed for awhile. My little Italian joint I work at is going to suffer. We can't do curbside, too much cost. So now after work we are all getting quite drunk and cooking up ourselves a hell pf a feast. So hey its the little things.

Good luck man, don't despair

[musiqsoulchild]

The thing that worries me isnt the Corona virus.

Its the aftermath.

The hit on economic systems, retirement incomes, pension funds, supply chains - its going to be long lasting event.

[dice]

welp, they just closed my gym for at least the next couple of weeks. seems unnecessary to me. not sure it's even an effective anti-coronavirus measure given that exercise helps the immune system

Smh. Dude, don't be ridiculous. Of course it's an unnecessary risk. You can very easily get adequate exercise away from a gym.

omg, i'm not talking about "adequate" exercise. walking around your neighborhood would obviously provide adequate exercise in the short-term

lol, the point is that many people (myself included) will NOT get nearly as much quality exercise while their gyms are shut down. they're not going to bench press their televisions or squat the end of their couch, they're far less likely to go for a run outside (particularly in bad weather) than use a treadmill, and doing endless pushups and situps alone in their apartments is sheer drudgery. why do you think that people pay for gym memberships?

wtf, i did not say that going to the gym is a necessary risk. i suggested that the risk/reward of shutting down gyms (including the loss of employee paychecks and reduced physical/mental health benefits) might not be appropriate. maybe it is, but it's hardly ridiculous to question

[ImSlower]

Well i am unemployed for awhile. My little Italian joint I work at is going to suffer. We can't do curbside, too much cost. So now after work we are all getting quite drunk and cooking up ourselves a hell pf a feast. So hey its the little things.

Good luck man, don't despair

I appreciate that. Thank you. I am pretty chipper really. I promise this is affecting me greatly and my life will be very difficult for awhile - especially if they keep restaurants closed much longer than March 31st, which i absolutely expect will happen. I am going to self isolate, stay away from my best buddies infant and newborn, and do a hell of a lot of work on my parents property. It'll actually be very healthy for me to not drink for a few weeks (as a career barman, I make a point to never drink at home unless I'm entertaining guests, and I'm a hermit so that doesnt happen).