sniper

On the electric ones you don't have to use the pedal assist, you can pedal under your own power and then turn it on either to boost your speed or get up a hill etc. Or just to go farther than you otherwise would. As for the trike, my cousin with MS has one and she loves it. She can't balance on a bike any more.

purplekow, I live in NJ and just saw that we are expected to hit peak hospitalization on 4/25, while NY seems to have already peaked. Given the fact we took measures at essentially the same time as NY, is that an indicator that NJ patients are staying longer in the hospital? Are we having better or worse mortality than NY? Or does it just mean that NJ is actually getting more people to the hospital while a lot of people who live alone in NYC are dying in their apartments?

It's going to be industry by industry for sure. Your business and lawyers come to mind as needing physical presence for the majority of staff. But insurance back-office, which is the bulk of the employment? They can do 90% of their work from home. Agencies are a different matter. I envision corporations headquarters being for training new hires and the like, with some additional space. Maybe they reduce their foot print and have people each come in 1 day per week by department for meetings etc. It's certainly true that meetings are better in person, but it's also true that a hell of a lot of meetings could be avoided if people just read their emails...

I think what will happen is this is going to go on long enough for businesses to figure out that a lot of stuff can be handled remotely, and commercial real estate is going to take a nosedive, which may spill over into residential rents falling and conversion of office space into residential, resulting in both more remote workers and more people living in the city - or more people living anywhere in the country and telecommuting to the cities where the headquarters will still be.

It's not at all surprising that if you taek steps that reduce transmission of an extremely highly contagious disease, you are going to also reduce transmission of diseases that are less contagious than the one you are trying to avoid. I'm sure STD rates will be relatively low as well given most people aren't hooking up or are at least reducing their number of partners.

NY is a lot more packed together population wise, and during the workday it's even more so. There's really nothing else in the US that is comparable to the NYC subway in scale and terms of sheer numbers of people passing through the same low-air-circulation space. CA way more people exercise outdoors as opposed to in crowded gym, etc.

I see people online on Grindr and Scruff, but I think a lot of them are just chatting/trading pics out by me. The college boys have nowhere to go because their parents are always around, and the older guys seem more sensible. There are definitely fewer online, and many of them say explicitly in their profiles that they are not meeting until this is over. There will always be stupid people but if most people are doing the right thing the curve still gets bent.

I think anatomically some guys just find penetration much more unpleasant than others.

He's taking up escorting in his 40s? Seems like a red flag.

He shows a lot on instagram...

And we can't "race towards what we need to do" until we have sufficient data to know what, in fact, we need to do. That is going to take another month at least.

Ezekiel Emanuel also says stuff like we should all just stop wasting medical resources after 75. So I think he's a bit grimmer than most. We simply won't be doing 18 months of shelter in place(if we really did that the virus WOULD die out, and if 18 months of SIP wouldn't cause that, that would suggest the measures being taken are useless, which the data so far does not support), and testing will be ramped up much sooner than that allowing a staggered rollout.

This people for whom the virus is "no big deal" have an all-causes mortality rate LOWER than that of COVID-19. I don't consider more than doubling the number of people who will die this year something we should just let happen.

I've considered buying myself a wedding band to improve my odds...

WTF are you talking about? The reason the death count is low is precisely BECAUSE of the shelter in place orders. It's like saying PreP doesn't work because so many fewer people get HIV now it's not a big deal....

I'm sorry for your loss and your current struggle to find care for your dad. All nursing homes countrywide are currently on lockdown, meaning he will go in there and you will not be able to visit him. I have a friend who put his mother in last month and now he can only talk to her on the phone, and he's wishing he had put her in there a few months earlier so he could have helped her acclimate. If you can afford it you might want to consider a live-in aide at home for a couple of months to see if they ease the restrictions once the numbers are down.(Are mobile physical therapists making house calls now?) Especially since you won't be able to really check out a facility in person until that happens. You say his speech is slurred but how is he cognitively? Does he understand what you say? If he's still mentally alert enough to understand why he can't have visitors, then yes, put him in the SNF for the higher frequency of care. If he's not (and it's financially doable) I'd try to look into home care options. Some states have fairly generous programs to keep people out of nursing homes. Good luck.

In some jurisdictions I think they are compelled to provide the information to the health department.

My fitbit estimates oxygen variation while asleep(I assume it's a fairly crude measure as a flag for possible apnea) and I've noticed that when I sleep on my back the variation occasionally gets into the zone they flag, but when I sleep on my side it's totally fine. Maybe sleeping on your side would be enough?

Very few people bought in precisely at 6547 so that's not really a fair point of comparison. What was the Dow in, say June 2001? it was over 15,000. Someone who bought and held then saw a 40% return...over 19 years. That's about 2% per year. P/E earnings are completely out of whack given the aging population and loads of corporate debt, and they also seemingly reflected the assumption that the Trump tax cuts would last forever. After all the stimulus spending there is no way taxes won't be going up in the coming years. And if it's personal taxes but not corporate taxes going up, that means less money for consumers to spend and less revenue for the companies. Also, 10 years is NOT a long time frame. The idea that a 56-year-old should be getting more into stocks than they currently are is not a good one given they have less time to make up a large loss. We don't know what allocation he was starting from. If he's 100% in stocks, he absolutely should be shifting out because that's highly risky. If he's 20% in stocks, well sure ride it out. There is a lot more room for the overall stock market to fall and still not be a "buy". There might be some short-term bumps based on stimulus, but I am bearish on the relatively near-term. There might well be individual stocks that make sense to buy now, but the market as a whole will be taking a beating for a while.

If you're properly distancing and doing any kind of mask, odds you will catch it are significantly reduced. It's the compounding effect of partial measures that reduces the risk. Sure, we could all wear hazmat suits and then just do pretty much whatever we wanted, but that's kind of unrealistic. But You do one thing that cuts risk 20%, and another, and another, and you have really made a dent in things. Suppose the number of cases triples every month if we do nothing. At the end of the year, one case becomes 3^12=531,441 cases. Now suppose everyone takes measures that reduce the rate of transmission 50%, so it doubles every month instead of tripling. Then that one case becomes 2^12=4,096. So by implementing measures that are only 50% effective, you could reduce the caseload 99%. And that buys time to develop a treatment or vaccine. Similarly even if not everyone adopts the measures but most people do, there's still a strong effect because chains of infection get broken. The above were made-up rates to illustrate the concept. Things that on the individual level are not perfect still have a profound cumulative effect. tl;dr doing something is better than doing nothing, and you don't need to freak out about not doing absolutely everything as long as most people are doing something. (If you yourself have a reason to think you are in a higher-risk group of complications, though, you are not wrong to want to take extra precautions beyond the recommendations).

Your 401k should have multiple fund options, including one that is cash or a money-market type fund. You can contribute but direct your contributions to that for now and then gradually move back into the market as it stabilizes. At 56 you should be shifting so a lower proportion of your portfolio is equities anyway.

It appears there are more bottom than tops in the general population, and don't about half if men over 45 have some level of ED? I'd guess their assumption is based on experience. Older tops, being a rarer commodity, are less likely to need to pay for it in the first place judging from the number of thirsty young bottoms into daddies I see in Grindr...

But how many people's willingness to pay even 20 is dependent upon a particular dancer/type of dancer to appear? And then that ups the number of dancers which the money must be spread among, which further lowers the vield per dancer, which means fewer dancers are going to bother, which means fewer people want to pay. They initially said they needed 30 customers willing to pay 50. If they had dropped it to 20, sure they would have gotten more than 30 customers, but would they have gotten 75 of them? I doubt it. They might have gotten 50, which means total of $1000, which means maybe 3 dancers(as opposed to 5) plus Tim and Matt's time and effort and I can't see how they'd want to bother at that point, and the customers who paid 20 bucks but whose preferred dancers didn't make the smaller lineup would be like, "Hey I can just go watch Sean Cody videos on xtube for free"... Their mailing list is probably just a couple hundred people, some of whom themselves are facing financial uncertainty. And they are also people who like to pay for a more tactile experience than a video show. It's by no means obvious that a lot of them are going to want a cam show, so it makes sense that they started small and at a high price point so they can have a critical mass of dancers to see if this thing is viable.

He's been known to do the occasional lapdance if it's slow at the bar (and I've had a few from him) but I got the impression he does not so I didn't ask. I doubt he'd be shocked/offended to be approached though(assuming you're polite about it).

The dancers will make money. Will the hosts? 50/30 was the point at which Tim and Matt find it worth their while to set it up. I was responding to the person suggesting they could have made it way cheaper, and I'm saying that's unlikely as most Adonis regulars know where to find naked pictures online...the relative handful of people to whom this show appeals are going to be those willing to pay a premium to see specific guys. If they drop the price to 10 bucks, I don't see it bringing in many more customers, and then they wouldn't have enough coming in to make it worth the dancers' time. Because they likely have regulars they can make their own deals with for something they aren't willing to put out in semi-public on the internet.