Hey guys,
Just saw some new research which found a correlation between climate change and home values. Every 1/4 degree increase in temperature causes a decrease of $250 to the value of homes: http://www.movoto.com/reports/climate-change.html

An example given was the state of New York, which lost over $9 billion in home values over the past 4 years because of climate change.

What do you guys think about this new correlation: another nasty side effect of the rising temperature?

that's interesting.

here's something else that's interesting.



NOTE: the blue dips are ice ages...

we're going to have to invent systems that produce pollution
or move underground.
and we're going to have to invent system's that can reverse
the effect's when the time is right.

sort of like an really large environment control system.

we could start now , before its too late.

china's pollution is holding it back , but diversification
would be the smarter way , if china becomes unable to produce
enough pollution then were in serious trouble.

Are you serious, Paul? If the Earth is only 6,000 years old, most of that chart is fiction!

Shouldn't we apply the same logic to that as to dust on the moon?

Hang on, though; you were being sarcastic?

This sounds bad, but is really a problem only if you have to sell your home and buy another in an area where prices have not fallen.

Are we actually better off now than when our homes were worth half their current value?

A drop in house prices would be a blessing for a struggling first-time purchaser.

Bill S. The loss of home values is a problem in large part because we have had so many people who have learned to think of their homes as an investment from which they will receive a large return. I was anxious to buy my home because I viewed it as a retirement investment. I was not planning to buy a house and hold it until I could sell it for more than what I paid for it. I bought it because I figured that when I retired I would have a place to live without having to pay rent or a mortgage payment. I now have a home that I don't have monthly payments to make. I have to pay taxes, insurance, and upkeep. But if I was renting or paying on a mortgage I would still be paying those things, plus interest on the mortgage (or the owners mortgage on the house/apartment). I might or might not be able to sell it for what I have in it, but I have place to live that won't be taken from me.

Bill Gill

dont be too sure about that either.

one thing you should look into is tax increases near large cities.

in the 1980's some cities in the U.S. increased the property taxes so much
that people who lived in a house all their lives had to sell the
house because their retirement income would not cover just the
new taxes.

they went from a few hundred dollars a year to 20,000 a year
in atlanta , many elderly people lost their homes because of it.

the reason was due to home values increasing , people who
had paid for homes were selling their homes because of the new taxes , someone
would buy it , put some money
in it and flip it for a few hundred thousand more.

the taxes were more than their income was going to be.

so , you might want to look into that.

Keep in mind that they sold their homes for much more than they paid for them also. So there is a good chance that they could bite the bullet and leave town. There are many places in this country where the cost of living is much lower than in places like Atlanta. If you lived in Southern California you could sell your home and move to Oklahoma and buy a real nice house and then have some left over. Granted a lot of people don't want to leave the place they have lived in all of their lives, but it can be done.

Bill Gill

at first people had homes that they sold for less because the
houses around them had not yet been sold at the much higher prices.

for instance , in 1980 a home valued by appraisal as 30,000
could be purchased for 30,000 , the next year its appraisal value had tripled.

only because of the appraisal values of home sales in the area.

some homes were originally sold for 30,000 in 1980
and in a few years the same house was appraised for and selling for 500,000

the people who were able to borrow money on their homes equity to pay the taxes were the ones who really got lucky.

it was just another rich mans way of stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

If rising house values favour the rich, do falling values favour the poor.

I have grave doubts about that.