patrick.net

In the 70’s, price shocks were caused by artificial factors (e.g. embargo). Now, the peak oil theory predicts that production will drop during rapidly increasing. The shortage is “more” real.

My husband has been getting a lot more literature through work that says this is not true. They say the reserves are bigger than reported. Again, I don't know what is or isn't true, but there are those who are very vocal in saying don't buy into hype over oil prices. I am not currently worried about an oil bubble, but if we do start trading at $100 a barrel then I would say we're definately in a bubble.

Prock,

I've visited Seattle & surrounding areas quite a few times, though I haven't lived there and can't speak authoritatively. Even so, based on my limited experience/knowledgee, I think you're far better off on just about all scores. Of course, no area is perfect or problem-free.

We just voted to build a monorail, and now we’re taking away funding. People are constantly wrangling over light rail (we don’t have anything like California’s rail system), and traffic is a mother-f—ing nightmare.

Ummm... you know where just about ALL of the nation's most congested freeways/roads are? As far as that wonderful light rail system goes, what we have (BART-NCAL, MetroRail-SCAL) is not adequate for our population needs and traffic problems, but, yes, it's better than nothing.

The city plans to toss about 15 billion (American, that is) down a tunnel to replace a crumbling viaduct.

Wow! You actually SPEND taxpayer money on infrastructure there?? I'm impressed...

Our school system is routinely a few billion over budget, and teachers are constantly striking or threatening to because our half-million dollar $hitboxes (not to be compared with your million-dollar $hitboxes) are still out of their reach.

Try routinely tens of billion over budget here. And as you pointed out, housing's still more affordable --or more accurately-- less unaffordable up there.

Also, I don’t want anyone else moving here and screwing up my commute.

Sorry, Prock, I'm coming ASAP. Maybe you can sponsor an anti-Californian immigrant ballot initiative to keep us out or something. :mrgreen:

My husband has been getting a lot more literature through work that says this is not true. They say the reserves are bigger than reported.

I read that production quotas are based on the estimated oil reserve in each OPEC member country, so there is definite incentive to over-report the amount of reserve.

Again, I am not an expert in oil or pretty much anything. I can have a chat with a friend of mine who is an energy analyst.

HARM, why not Vancouver, BC? It is just 3 hours away from Seattle and it has slightly less rainy days per year. It has many good, cheap restaurants and health care is (so far) taken care of.

Again, I am not an expert in oil or pretty much anything. I can have a chat with a friend of mine who is an energy analyst.

That sound like an excellent idea. Nothing like an expert opinion.

Yes, out agribusiness (and construction and garment and hotel) industry is now dependent on migrant labor. Mainly because they’ve deliberately engineered it that way (i.e., use sub-minimum wage illegals to drive out Americans and small domestic businesses as well).

Well...I don't claim to know much about ag, but I do recall a trend moving towards large farms vs. the traditional family farm, which incidentally got my family out of farming altogether; it was no longer competitive. The same holds true for parts of europe, but there govts. heavily subsidize many traditional farmers to "continue the cultural tradition". I suppose the question still persists: how many Americans would be happy with agricultural jobs, and could they be paid "fair wages"? California has a huge ag economy, and currently I'd have to wonder if American farm workers could ever afford a house--it's hard enough for "highly paid professionals". Sigh.
While I like cheap produce, I think our current migrant population should also be given a worker's permit and enter the labor pool legitimately. This talk of "closing borders", while industry hires illegals strikes me as very hypocritical.

I seriously considered Vancouver, BC a few years back. The wife and I went up there on vacation, and liked it so much, we actually met with an immigration attorney. He told us to stay the hell out of Canada --we'd just drive down wages and overload their health, transportation and education infrastructure. Plus we don't speak Canadian.

HAHAHA, just kidding...

Really, he said (at the time) that based on our employment histories, we'd have a tough time qualifying, based on Canada's point system. Haven't looked into it recently, though.

Really, he said (at the time) that based on our employment histories, we’d have a tough time qualifying, based on Canada’s point system. Haven’t looked into it recently, though.

I am very surprised. I thought they have a very liberal immigration system.

BTW, I consider Vancouver the best city I have ever visited. You need to create your own job though.

While I like cheap produce, I think our current migrant population should also be given a worker’s permit and enter the labor pool legitimately.

I have mixed feelings about that idea Kurt. It may be inevitavle, given the current situation, but I don't like the message it sends (i.e., reward current law-breakers and you get even more). Recall Reagan's general amnesty of the 1980's. With the promise being, we'll ok these guys for now, but from now on, we're enforcing the border! Yeah... that worked out REAL well.

However, I am not against increasing the amount of Visas/work permits and increasing LEGAL immigration quotas --or abolishing them altogether. I am sure THAT will never happen, though, because most of the affected industries do NOT want legal immigrants in those jobs earning living wages and benefits or under protection of U.S. laws & unions.

This talk of “closing borders”, while industry hires illegals strikes me as very hypocritical.

Yes. Very hypocritical of industry.

I am very surprised. I thought they have a very liberal immigration system.

It all depends on where you're from. If your from a non-democratic country, such as China, you get automatic political asylum the second your foot touches Canadian soil. If you're from the U.S., Europe, Australia, etc., you need to have enough points and go through their residency system --not all that different from the U.S. really. That's how he explained it to me back then anyways...

While I like cheap produce, I think our current migrant population should also be given a worker’s permit and enter the labor pool legitimately.

I do not mind paying more for stuff so long as the law is enforced and inflation is truthfully reflected in the CPI.

One of my Mom's best friends lives right on the Ca/Mex border and her family has lived and farmed the area for generations. It is basically considered normal to hire illegals. It's come to the point where the farmers can't pay a higher wage and remain competetive when all the other farmers have a work force of illegals, so they all end up doing it. It's so accepted that the families in the area all have maids/nannies etc. who are illegals and no one thinks anything of it.

you need to have enough points and go through their residency system

I think they also have investment-based immigration. If you have cash-sitting around waiting for the bubble to burst it may not be a bad idea... ;)

I do not mind paying more for stuff so long as the law is enforced and inflation is truthfully reflected in the CPI.

Ditto. Same goes for gas prices too. If $6/gallon is what it takes to end this country's addiction to cheap Middle East oil and start developing alternative energy technology, I say bring it on.

Ditto. Same goes for gas prices too. If $6/gallon is what it takes to end this country’s addiction to cheap Middle East oil and start developing alternative energy technology, I say bring it on.

Yes, $10 gas? So be it! It is time for alternative energy and sustainable lifestyle. Perhaps I should move to within 2-miles of work. Good to have renter's flexibility. ;)

SactoQt,

It's sad to see what happens to society when the laws are routinely not enforced and everyone loses all respect for them as a result. And when people are basically forced to break it in order to remain "competitive". It's all about our "race to the bottom".

Of course, we could raise or abolish immigration quotas, so all this off-the-books business gets taxed and the workers can earn decent wages, but... OMG!! That's so anti-business of me! Must read National Review/WSJ and purge such Commie thought from my head right away...

Ditto. Same goes for gas prices too. If $6/gallon is what it takes to end this country’s addiction to cheap Middle East oil and start developing alternative energy technology, I say bring it on.

Wouldn't that have more far-reaching consequences than mere transportation/energy issues? I'm thinking in terms of all those products derived from petroleum; any suitable replacements out there for plastics, etc? It seems our consumption-based "economy" is catching up with us.

Harm

It's interesting because right now it is so 'way of life' there. Not only do the residents think its fine but so do the illegals because most of them send most of the money back home to the rest of the family. Slave wages here are still better than what they can get in Mex so as far as they're concerned it's fine. I don't know if change will be possible if everyone is happy with the status quo.

Wouldn’t that have more far-reaching consequences than mere transportation/energy issues? I’m thinking in terms of all those products derived from petroleum; any suitable replacements out there for plastics, etc? It seems our consumption-based “economy” is catching up with us.

Good point. I think biofuel research holds a lot of promise (no, I don't mean corn-based ethanol, which btw uses more energy to make than it "produces"). You can actually get most diesel engines to run on cooking oil --amazing but true: tinyurl.com/bcjsq Not sure if you can generate plastics from it though.

Kurt has a good point. All that plastic crap we get from China is gonna cost a fortune! And it'll cost more than twice as much to build it (since their industry is using woefully inefficient energy), and more than twice as much to ship it here. This means less buying from the American public (whose wages are shrinking and whose cheap debt is vanishing), which means bad times ahead for Chinese manufacturing. This could mean the return of manufacturing jobs to the US. The debt bubble and peak oil will cause massive changes worldwide.

Still, I bet Great Depression II will be blamed on Hurricane Katrina and the billions of dollars of damage it's done, just like the last Recession was blamed on 9/11.

I don’t know if change will be possible if everyone is happy with the status quo.

If by "everyone" you mean rich people and big business, then yes. I haven't met too many taxpaying middle or working class people of any ethnicity who are too thrilled about the status quo. Of course, we "don't count" in such a high-stakes political game, do we ;-).

If by “everyone” you mean rich people and big business, then yes. I haven’t met too many taxpaying middle or working class people of any ethnicity who are too thrilled about the status quo.

But I thought everyone but us make 400K in the financial industry and bid 400K over asking price of a house. ;)

Bubble Sitter, many people assumed the maximum tax benefit as "promised" by the realtors and mortgage brokers when they buy. By the time they realize the situation, they are stuck.

If by “everyone” you mean rich people and big business, then yes. I haven’t met too many taxpaying middle or working class people of any ethnicity who are too thrilled about the status quo. Of course, we “don’t count” in such a high-stakes political game, do we .

Too true
Kind of harkens back to the article you posted about the 30-somethings leaving (Santa Clara?) in droves. Obviously the current status quo is not working for a lot of people. When I said status quo I was referring to the situation on the Ca/Mex border in a micro perspective. That town is happy with the situation, I can't speak for other areas. I know I am not at all happy with a good income not getting squat in this state. I just it was more feasable to move, I have no doubt I could find an affordable area that I would like just fine. Besides, I hate the Sacto heat and the lack of seasons here. I'd happily trade the heat for more rain.

It might start happening a bit in Santa Clara, but here there’s a lot of pretty-well paid tech workers in their 30s that can afford to live here.

The unemployment rate here in the Silliland is still quite high among regular tech workers. On the other hand, I have several ex-coworkers who moved to Texas because of the housing situation.

Welcome back, astrid!
Gee, can't imagine what drove you away for so long... I'm trying to think, but it's iMPossible for me to say. Did someone on this blog show you rudeness or conteMPt?

Does the home market will go down to 1998/99 level. If so how long that would take ?

Yes. It can very easily go back to 1998 level. It may take 5 to 7 years though.

HARM, check your Caps Lock. It seems to be stuck for certain character sequence.

Thanks for pointing that out, Peter ;-) . How strange, my keyboard must have an iMPerfection or something. What an iMPenetrable oddity...

I am amazed about your confidence( you said very easily) that the home market can go down to 1999 level at some point ?

Okay, let me repeat in Greenspeak:

Whether prices will drop to 1999 level is difficult to ascertain, even in areas full of froth and speculative fervor. I certainly cannot rule out such deep decline in the Bay Area, especially in condos.

You're right, Jack --see above:

Zephyr Says:
August 30th, 2005 at 8:25 pm

I believe that we are about to enter a typical cyclical decline which should reach bottom around 2008 or 2009 at prices about equal to what we saw in early 2004.

I think this is unrealistically optimistic. If prices only give back 1 year of gains, this will not restore balance in terms of either PE ratios or affordability, unless of course both median incomes AND rents suddenly shoot up. Just don't see that happening anytime soon...

Peter, that was really good. Do you want a job a the Fed? They have an opening in January, you know.

If prices only give back 1 year of gains, this will not restore balance in terms of either PE ratios or affordability, unless of course both median incomes AND rents suddenly shoot up. Just don’t see that happening anytime soon…

If prices reverts only to early 2004 level, many Silly condos will still suffer 20+% drops.

TestMe, can you describe your condo (location, price range, size, view)? If it has 3 or 4 bedrooms, it "behaves" more like a single family house.

Usually, condo prices are more volatile. However, there are exceptions.

I thought condo prices go up and down in a shorter time frame.

Also, I could be wrong... (should have used the Greenspeak version first).

Mine is a townhome -3 bedroom, with backyard/frontyard and near to BART. May be it is more like a single family home ? I am not sure about condo prices in other parts of silicon valley ?

Ah... if it has an attached garage, yards, and 3 bedroom with no "vertical" neighbors, it is "almost" like a house. It is somewhere between condo and house.

Paul_from_Oz suggested in the 'Natural Disasters' thread that they do not rebuild New Orleans (at least not on the same site) due to high risk of a flood repeat and rising sea levels all over the world.

I believe this is probably good advice, with the possible exception of the historic French Quarter & Garden District. I don't think it's practical/possible to move every historic building to higher ground, and they could just build higher, more permanent concrete levies around just those areas.

Thoughts, opinions...?

It will be very interesting to see how the rebuilding of New Orleans plays out. I think it would be smart not to rebuild there, except for preserving that small historic area, but then, I can't think of any examples of natural disasters that caused people to have the en masse common sense to just go rebuild someplace safer. Are there such examples?

People continue to live in flood plains, hurricane zones, and regions that have high risk of earthquakes and landslides. Given the magnitude of this latest disaster though, it makes me wonder if it will mark a departure from that.

Perhaps we can just engineer infrastructures to withstand nature?

There have been attempts in Netherland and Venice. I do not know how well they work though.