Hacker News Reader

Comment by vjk800 | Hacker News Reader

Same observation from Finland. Additionally, being even slightly drunk in front of children has become very no-no. I recently had a small gathering of other families with children at my home and I made the mistake of offering them some beers. Everyone declined and the looks I got were the same as if I had offered them crack cocaine.

I don't think it's all good, though, since a lot of social events that were previously facilitated by alcohol just disappear. Like who the fuck actually enjoys acquantainces' children's birthdays without a beer or two? Turns out people suck at socialising without alcohol, and if alcohol disappears, people just stay at home and play video games or something.

View on HN

This is going to sound like I'm over generalizing and maybe even a bit... racist? and I already apologize for it, it's not my intention. I hope I can pass the actual message I'm trying to pass. So, let's go.

Doesn't Finland, like the other Nordic countries, have a long history of alcohol abuse and pushing against it (like, with draconian prices)? Isn't maybe just that policy "winning"? Also, couldn't this be yet another case where the Nordic are seen as "one step beyond" the rest like it was the case when fully digitalizing schools, only then to backpedal realizing it's not all so good and there are drawbacks that were not considered?

I say this to connect with the second part of your post, to which I fully agree: alcohol is not generally good for health and it can be abused but also small quantities here and there won't probably hurt you in a serious way and will give some social benefits like the ones you mentioned. (and the same applied to other light drugs as well!)

Finland definitely has a history of binge drinking and straight up alcoholism. However, I don't think the state can take credit for consumption going down, since the decline in drinking among younger generations seems pretty much global at this point.

Exactly, the younger generations just stay at home, on the internet. So social drinking has mostly disappeared. Those that really want to get totally drunk probably still do though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsdrunk

> Doesn't Finland, like the other Nordic countries, have a long history of alcohol abuse and pushing against it (like, with draconian prices)? Isn't maybe just that policy "winning"?

Yes and no; all the Nordic / Lutheran countries have some mildly prohibitionist policies like the Norwegian wine monopoly, and yes it gets very dark and depressing up there which led to alcohol abuse becoming a social problem in the early 20th century, but that situation was stable for years and the decline in alcohol consumption is a global phenomenon.

Denmark never had any kind of mild alcohol prohibitionist policies or restrictions

Alcoholism was a huge problem if you go back several 100 of years where home distillation was rampant, and there is indeed regulation and taxes to control it in Denmark. You can ask an LLM for more details. It's just not done the way say Sweden does it.

While the origins may be religious, I'd say the high taxes on alcohol and most alcoholic beverages only being available in state-run shops (Systembolaget/Vinmonopolet/Alko/Vínbúðin) is by now a 100% Nordic phenomenon.

The most interesting situation is actually in Iceland: full prohibition introduced 1915, wine legalized 1922, all other beverages legalized 1935 except for (of all things) beer with more than 2.25% ABV, which had to wait until 1 March 1989 (since then celebrated as "Beer Day") - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_Iceland

17 US states have monopolies on the sale of alcohol at the distribution or retail level so it is not just a Nordic thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_beverage_control_sta...

I believe this is common in Canadian provinces as well?

Ah, ok, that's interesting! I have been to the US three times, and was aware that there are still some counties with complete prohibition, but wasn't aware of this particular quirk. But, even from that list, it's hard to tell which states sell alcoholic beverages only in state-operated stores (similar to the Nordic states), and which license private stores to sell them (which is common throughout the world, but of course more restrictive in some places than in others).

Most states still have very strange laws around alcohol due to the aftermath of prohibition.

I grew up in NY where beer cannot be sold in liquor stores, but can be sold in grocery stores. But grocery stores can only sell beer that is less than 6% ABV so any beer that is higher ABV can only be sold directly by breweries or by beer distributors.

Right next store in NJ, beer is only sold in liquor stores and for the longest time breweries could not legally sell you beer for on-site consumption so a bunch of breweries got around this by offering a $5 tour and as a part of the tour you were given a glass of beer.

I live close to a city that only allows city-owned liquor stores, Eden Prairie MN. But it's trivial to drive to the next city over and shop wherever you want.

No, more to do with health concerns and antisocial behaviour.

My impression is that decline can mostly be attributed to gen Z. They grew up with social media that made a better point to emphasis how dangerous alcohol is. Previous dominant media, at most, had very sterile disclaimers that alcohol is bad for you.

Romania has seen a similar decline in consumption (though still in top 3 across EU in consumption), such as that nowadays we have articles from media outlets (as a voice for the industry) that complain of the downward trend. While in reality we should be celebrating this change in culture!

Of course we should be, but the line went down, therefore we need 600 think-pieces attempting to shame us for caring for our health.

Wife and I used to be avid drinkers but with the expansion of legal cannabis, it's just not as good of an option. I'll still make myself a negroni or an old fashioned on occasion, just because they're delicious, but I haven't drank-to-get-drunk in YEARS. If I'm actually trying to unwind (and who isn't given the sheer STATE of our world!) I'm spoiled for choices of substances that both don't interact with my depression nearly as badly as alcohol and, as a bonus, don't make me gain weight like an inflation fetish character.

The alcohol industry won spectacularly for decades a game of public policy and image where alcohol, a substance connected to industrial quantities of human death and suffering, was somehow the "accepted and normal" way to get fucked up when you wanted to be, even though again, numerous alternatives existed that were better for you. They're going to go through a similar process to tobacco I think, which is to say: it'll still be around, but it will shrink to an industry sized appropriately for the actual demand of it's product.

It is a generational thing, but IMO you've got the wrong root cause. Discussion of the dangers of drinking stems from people choosing not to drink, and people are choosing not to drink because they are attending the kinds of social gatherings that are lubricated by alcohol less.

As such, I'm hesitant to point to the decline in alcohol sales as a public health win. If people were drinking less simply because they were choosing to drink less, that's probably a public health win. If people are drinking less because their social lives have evaporated, that's probably really bad.

the article also explicitly called out that boomers aging out of the market is a driving factor.

its easy to forget just how freakishly large that cohort is and how they are all steeped in alcohol as the primary way to an altered state.

As they get too old to drink for various health reasons it makes sense that california wine especially would take the hit because boomers also have all the money so they are the ones buying fancy wine.

the younger gens not backfilling the demand contributes but it was never going to be at boomer levels anyway.

Get ready for a lot more stories like this as boomers stop doing all kinds of things... traveling, buying cars etc.

Your factors are real, but I think both elements are at play. I admit I could be biased as I see gen Z as more disciplined, locked in, from gyms to lifestyle.

Socialisation, or lack thereof, is a great problem for many people and newer generations raised "online", when you get for free at home endless social media distraction.

But even the 20 year olds I've met in bars were likely to stop drinking way sooner than us milenials, which still get plastered, at least on special occasions.

In the US Gen Z doesn't drink because of social isolation. Drinking was always a social thing and drinking alone has a stigma associated with it. Also, THC use has become much more socially acceptable and that has replaced a lot of alcohol use.

Gen Z still parties and socializes, but their parties are constantly recorded and posted on social media. There's much higher stakes to getting wasted and making a fool out of yourself in the panopticon.

Finland's alcoholism-curbing policies date from the early twentieth century and the kind of abuse they were meant to curb was especially the drinking of spirits. Then, nothing changed for decades until, quite recently, beer sales have actually become more liberalized and you can buy higher-strength stuff in supermarkets.

No, no its not the Finns nor the russians. Its the latvian and estonian harbours :P

I'd say that here in Finland, the decline in alcohol use has more to do with global trends, especially with the younger generations. The problem though is that there has not been any replacement for the social lubrication required here for people to attempt to be social. Purely based on my own experiences, people are less social, go out less, and therefore use less alcohol.

Feels as if the death of religion is followed by the death of bars, restaurants and other places to go out to in the evening, especially after Covid, leaving even fewer places to meet people.

It's true that people up here tend to get very drunk collectively as the evening drags on, which has always bothered me as somebody who doesn't drink alcohol... First everybody's very dry and awkward, then it's fun for an hour or so, and then things start getting over the top and pretty mental. Compared with central Europe, people don't slow down a few glasses in.

But all that is changing as it seems many people just stopped going out at all. So people might drink less alcohol, but I'm not sure that indicates an improvement of mental health or social coherence. The internet is making people lonelier.

From my anecdotal experience in Sweden, I suspect it might have a lot to do with the lasting economic situation since Covid. People do not seem to be able to afford going out or having people over like they used to.

Prices have increased a lot, making the margins even harder to survive on for the majority.

Is it literally hard to survive? Even with a job and statistically nobody having children and a sparsely populated small country? Perhaps it is better to just not have a job and live on government welfare.

If that is unsustainable for the country then eventually something might change. Until then you have to play the hand you're dealt.

Yes, for a lot of people in the lower income bracket it is difficult to make ends meet[0].

[0]: https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/vast/ekonomiska-svarighete...

I believe you are correct about the general decline in socializing. Came across this article about it yesterday https://www.derekthompson.org/p/the-death-of-the-american-ho...

“In short, the great disinvitation is real, and we can’t wish or explain it away by arguing that Americans are just finding new ways to be with friends.”

> Isn't maybe just that policy "winning"?

Of course not. The trend is global and has no connection to government policy in Nordic countries.

> alcohol is not generally good for health and it can be abused but also small quantities here and there won't probably hurt you in a serious way

Hate to 'uMm aCktUalLy...' but hm... actually...

https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-...

Their statement was appropriately hedged. They didn't claim small amounts were harmless, just that it wouldn't hurt in a "serious" way. Your rush to "um actually" someone meant you missed what was being said and "um actually"'d a statement that existed only in your mind. Anyway...

Everyone's threshold for "serious" harm is different.

For adult men, if you drink fewer than 15 drinks per week but greater than zero, the expected decrease of average lifespan is measured in months not years. Obviously more than zero. Is that "serious" enough to not partake? Up to each person.

My bad.

I have an anecdotal situation dealing with dementia ridden parents from chronic drinking. And similar with grandparents. My risk tolerance is zero for alcohol. besides the lifespan being reduced: quality of life tanks off of a fucking cliff, dragging everyone you love and who loves you down there too.

Sorry to hear that, but your experiences aren't universal. Absolutism is a sensible option especially if there's been problems in the family. It's not the only sensible option for everyone.

> experiences aren't universal

agreed: but considering the ratio of friends who are in similar situations, I suspect the group I'm in is larger than you assume.

In Eastern Europe it's still quite usual to have a few drinks at parties but we don't have it at lunch because one would most likely drive to work, so then it's a big no-no. Bulgaria and Greece have 0.5‰ tolerance for alcohol while driving and also allow public drinking (except where explicitly prohibited), but I would still not do it because it's easy to exceed the limit or get involved in an accident and then it's your fault regardless. Thus one might end up having a glass or two in the evening, after work hours. I'd possibly have a beer or two in the evening during dog walks or some wine in the evening with my wife. When we walk by the pub, my dog almost always pulls me towards the terrace.

In France they still drink a glass or two during lunch break. I've seen office workers in La Défense, where one would normally commute using Paris Métro Line 1.

I started to correct you that the limit was surely 0.05%, but then I saw you snuck a per-mille sign in, instead of a percent sign. Nicely done

Wait, what? I had no idea this symbol existed!

Same ! Very cool

Is it actually measured per mile ? As in if your a mile or less from your destination you can have a higher blood alcohol ?

No. Per-mile just means “per 1000 parts” just like per-cent means „per 100 parts”

No it's like ppm or ppb, only parts per thousand and named per mille or per mil from Latin. Note the double L. The sign for it is ‰.

In the US the reverse happened. Although people drink less, you do get offered alcohol everywhere. I don't remember it being present at places like zoos, kids indoor playgrounds, state fairs, etc. I was even at a birthday at a public park at 10am Sunday morning and saw some White Claws being passed around.

People drink less but there is less stigma around alcohol and obvious other once illegal drugs.

I think it very much depends on what groups. Because taboos on alcohol in formerly kosher environments are new (~2016+?), there's uneven adherence.

You saw the same thing with smoking in the 90s in the US. Kids nowadays wouldn't believe the amount of bitching there was that you couldn't smoke inside restaurants, etc.

And I get it -- cultural assumptions changing is messy and can feel confusing to people.

PS: Also alcohol sold in public spaces has relatively high margins, so that explains that.

I think smoking is going through a mini-resurgence right now.

I think back to my childhood and smoking was everywhere. My high school (graduated in 1989) had a smoking area for students. Cigarette smoke wafted out of the teacher's lounge. Kids would light up as soon as they got off the bus on a field trip. I don't have many specific memories of it, but people must have reeked.

Alcohol was also huge. We had a fifth year of high school (grade 13) and so there were plenty of 19 year old students and the drinking age was 19. Students would buy beer on their lunch period for the weekend and store it in their locker and nobody thought anything of it.

Smoking is a plant-based alternative to vaping.

Dang, you sound like you were in school in Ontario at the same time as me? I also graduated from grade 13 in 1989...

I remember alcohol being present at all those places since the 80s.

Genuinely feels like we're optimising for a less human way to interact with each other in pursuit of some nicer statistics (hooray people live two tenths of a year longer). Why even have children if everything surrounding them has to be miserable these days.

I do have a feeling that the social structures, and perhaps even biology, have evolved over centuries with alcohol present to grease the wheels. It can allow a higher baseline of introversion / neuroticism (which facilitates higher performance in some areas but worse socialising), with the ability to drink to boost the social aspect when needed. Chesterton's beer, in other words.

But at what cost ? If your society needs alcohol to help the introverted and slightly neurotic fit in then you are just incentivising those people to have substance abuse issues.

There's a compelling argument that civilization itself is a bunch of scaffolding around beer making. Human social lives have been shaped by alcohol since before agriculture. Conflating having a few drinks with substance abuse is like saying eating lunch is an eating disorder.

Society being healthier is a good thing, but not at the cost of human socialization.

This is sad to hear.

On the whole I think it's a terrible thing that people have started taking themselves too seriously.

> Everyone declined and the looks I got were the same as if I had offered them crack cocaine.

should have offered them some THC to chill them out :P

> Like who the fuck actually enjoys acquantainces' children's birthdays without a beer or two?

That's really just a personal trait. I love going to my kid's friend's birthdays because we get to talk to the other parents who have become good friends as well, plus we don't have to look after the kids as much. "Adult time" and we know they're having fun. I don't have to drink in those.

I guess not everyone is that outgoing and not every parent group is as friendly as mine but it's hard to see getting drunk as a necessary counter to that.

> Turns out people suck at socialising without alcohol, and if alcohol disappears, people just stay at home and play video games or something.

Again, a personal trait. It's extremely common here in Brazil to drink but it's also very common to just not drink and have as much fun. Someone saying they need to have alcohol to enjoy themselves at a gathering is not going to be looked at very kindly, as if everyone else was just so boring they had to intoxicate themselves to bear through it.

As an introvert kids' birthday parties are purgatory for me.

And that's what the beer is for. Your ancestors figured this out thousands of years ago: alcohol makes socializing easier, and more enjoyable.

> Someone saying they need to have alcohol to enjoy themselves at a gathering is not going to be looked at very kindly, as if everyone else was just so boring they had to intoxicate themselves to bear through it.

Well duh, which is why nobody would ever say that out loud. Doesn't stop anyone from thinking it, though.

I say shit like this out loud. Usually when I'm drunk.

Whenever I go to one of my kid's friends' birthday parties, it's basically split into two groups: 1. Boomers / GenX "the grandparents" sitting together drinking beer and socializing, and 2. GenZ / Millennials "the parents" sitting alone scrolling their phones.

> Like who the fuck actually enjoys acquantainces' children's birthdays without a beer or two?

That is a fair point, but personally I enjoy the time during which my child is playing with their peers and not trying to have me as a substitute for these kinds of interactions.

At this exact moment there is another post [1] on HN from Derek Thompson talking about the >70% drop over the past few decades in having other people over to socialize for dinner. Correlation is not causation, and...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49891295

> Like who the fuck actually enjoys acquantainces' children's birthdays without a beer or two?

You have a reason to go there, which is socialising with the parents presumably. If you can't have fun with people without drinking and then blame it on the lack of alcohol... that's no good.

I'm sympathetic to parent (both ways) on this one. Acquaintances' kids birthdays are and should be mostly about the kids.

The kids are friends: that's why the parents are there. The parents may or may not particularly vibe with each other.

And a small amount of alcohol does take the sharp edges off social interactions with someone who might otherwise annoy you.

I get the sentiment, but it seems to me like a crutch that should be worked on getting rid of. It can't be that painful to be with other people, if it is, we need to work on ourselves and the culture. The jump from "I'm bored/uncomfortable" -> "might as well get drunk" seems wrong and a slippery slide to boot.

Having a drink or two is not the same thing as getting drunk.

Human beings have been complaining about other people at social events being bores since antiquity. There is no work on oneself and the culture that will, at a societal level, make all such interactions pleasant.

Seneca sharing a quote in Moral Letters to Lucilius, Letter 7 [~62 CE] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius/Let...

>> Democritus says: “One man means as much to me as a multitude, and a multitude only as much as one man.”

Having a beer or two at a kids birthday party is a world away from getting trashed at a college party. Personally, I need a drink to loosen up and not be so uptight around casual acquaintances. I offer the same courtesy when I host birthday parties.

In my experience it also often makes that mildly annoying person a lot more annoying (as in their behaviour)

The reason you go to kids' birthday parties because your child was invited and they're too young to go alone.

You can socialize and you kind of have to, but they've probably invited every classmate from preschool or whatever, so there's 20 people you probably haven't met before, have nothing in common except having kids the same age, and will probably never see again (except maybe at the next birthday party). And often the parties are held in a McDonalds or something, so catering is chicken nuggets and shitty cake with a Paw Patrol motif.

> And often the parties are held in a McDonalds or something,

God, what a great childhood I had...

I can't even imagine a birthday party being held in some joint or something.

In my country a kid having a birthday always meant homemade food and fun (up to the age of 15 or something).

80s birthday parties at McDonald's were the shit. You got to make your own food as a kid, the kitchen was yours.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com