What Can We Expect From Next Housing Crash? Based on 2009 One?

Competely agree. Traffic has increased enormously in the last 5 years in my commute. Another indicator that housing is in demand and not on a ‘bubble’ in my area. There are so many more people moving into our area than ever before. Overpriced houses stay on the market and come back down to realized prices but do eventually get sold after a couple months.

We’ll also likely see demand for housing increase in certain areas as some coastal cities become uninhabitable, or at the very least, imprudent to build permanent residences in.

Please expand on this.

I suspect it is because that by 2016, most of the coastal cities will be under water from the rising seas due to global warming.

1 Like

Uninhabitable? No. But insurance cost will rise and building code will be more stringent, particularly on the East and SE coastal areas.

You believe whatever you want Floyd :wink:

Anyway, regardless, the increased costs to build and live there, and the risks associated with living in some of these cities, will at the very least turn them more into vacation areas. Large businesses can’t afford to stay headquartered in these cities if their offices and employees’ homes are damaged every five years.

Ok, Can you elaborate? I been wrong before and will again but can we at least have a informative discussion?

Which specific cities are you referring to and what time frame? Eventually, sure, the Sun will go red dwarf and none of these matters.

Sorry, wasn’t intentionally trying to not give specifics, you basically already hit the general areas, so didn’t find it necessary to comment on that. But, while it isn’t necessarily true that a number of cities will become uninhabitable, I’m pretty confident some will. In terms of timing, I don’t know, but I’m not talking about thousands of years; I would guess that it happens within the next 20ish years. Some possible cities I’m referring to:
Miami, Jacksonville, Charleston, Columbia, Wilmington, New Orleans, Houston, San Diego, parts of LA

I would be willing to bet my home equity against you.

1 Like

I cannot imagine the temperatures rising by 2C or more helping making them more fertile though. It’ll just move the stick a tiny bit on coastal areas but the bulk of the land is going to be even less likely to support plant growth.

I think this has more to do with Earth’s axis, ocean currents, and wind patterns. Dry air passing over the land turns it into desert. Moist air makes it fertile again. Global warming certainly has an effect on ocean currents and wind patterns, but rising temperatures by themselves don’t imply changes between arid and moist air passing over any specific area. /IANAClimateScientist.

1 Like

Doubly so…we’ll be the fossils that turned into their fuel.


It’s fair, I wouldn’t be willing to bet any substantial amount of money on my guess. I would be willing to bet my current home equity against your current home equity though ;).

I do find significant fault in the argument that “this guy said we would have experienced these problems by today, and we haven’t yet experienced those problems (although we have experienced problems that the scientific community predicted would eventually lead to the ultimate conclusion), so this guy was wrong and we will never experience the problems.”

When the special counsel was first appointed Trump said they wouldn’t find anything and the investigation would be over in a couple weeks/ months. The investigation isn’t over yet. It doesn’t mean that Trump was wrong about the timing so he also must be wrong that they won’t find anything. It just means he was wrong about the timing. (ETA: I’m not saying they won’t find anything, just pointing out the flaw in the logic)

OT. But yes, that’s wrong already. People have already been prosecuted and pleaded guilty for some of their crimes.
“Anything” has been found. The “worst possible scenario”, and more importantly provable evidence of incredible and previously barely imaginable crimes committed by a now-sitting President have not occurred.
You are correct that even when the investigation finishes, regardless of the outcome it will not “prove” that the unbelievable crimes did not occur. Just that there is no way for the limited special counsel to prove it or that even if so congress is unwilling to impeach and the senate is unwilling to remove from office based on the findings.

“Global Warming” can be misleading. One city having abnormally cold temperatures for 2 or 3 years leads crazies to say “this proves there’s no Global Warming!”. It’s not just about a warming trend, it’s an abnormally fast warming trend that would not have been as fast without human impact and could be mitigated by a litany of possible cooperative actions.
Climate Change is not just warming, it’s again precipitated by abnormally fast environmental changes that are largely caused by human impact. The results can be warming in some areas, cooling in others, and more / less moisture in others.

Agreed it’s hard to imagine most of the deserts becoming fertile based on average global temperatures rising.


Thank your deity or non-deity of choice for global warming. Otherwise, we’d have global cooling, and we all know where that took us.

that’s never been the main stream science view. I wonder what you guys got your information from.

1 Like

One thing about pseudo science is that one can ALWAYS cherry pick that data or words. Let’s for the sake of argument that this one guy is wrong about 99% of the thing he said, Does it mean the scientific consensus on global warming is wrong? Think about that for a second.

The difference between true scientific skeptic is the true skeptic change their mind based on the evidence. The self-described global-warming skeptic are more apt described as deniers and the tactic they deployed is like other deniers of scientific consensus.


Then whatever you say or think on the subject carries zero weight. When 99 out of 100 dentists tell you that you need a root canal, you tell them you’re skeptical, because they’re in it for the money!

I thank you.


Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet, just not the final one. It’s nowhere near 97% in the West, as about 20-30% of the western population are atheists/antitheists. Russia did beat Germany. As did America. And they probably couldn’t have done it without each other.

The fact that the whole world disagrees about religion is evidence that the whole world is probably wrong. The world does not disagree about AGW.

I have an advanced degree in science and a general curiosity about the world (I read science and technology articles and don’t watch reality television). I don’t have expertise in climatology (an undergrad intro to Geology, which covered weather patterns and other natural phenomenon probably doesn’t count, but it’s probably more than many other non-scientists studied), but when 99.9% of professionals are in agreement, and those few who are in disagreement had their research funded by the oil & coal industry, I take the word of the 99.9%. I can also approach it from the point of probability – the probability of all of them being completely wrong is close to nil.

It’s a pretty good guess though. The mini ice ages, sun spots, other natural phenomenon, and any pseudo scientific mumbo-jumbo cannot explain it. Here’s all the proof I need on one slide – https://xkcd.com/1732/.

I don’t disagree in general, but this question has been questioned since the 50s, the evidence has been mounting, the United Nations has been working on this since 1992. Let this question go already. The worst that could happen is we’ll all breathe cleaner air.