John Doe Posted November 21, 2012 Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 I thought Japan was set to be swallowed by the sea sometime soon anyway*? The advantage being that if your home, being a physical asset, is smaller, you practically lost much less in this scenario, if you survive that particular apocalypse. -- *That's what some soothsayers are proclaiming anyway... on "another" thread... What, you mean it didn't happen? Have to be honest, think it's going to be a grim 2 or 3 months here too (not quite as bad as an apocalypse mind). But then think we might get (dare I say it) a bit of a spring bounce (well, when I say bounce, I actually mean more of a stop to the slow gring down) with the fiscal cliff sorted by then, the US homes market seemingly turning around and the FLS etc kicking in here properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TestIcicle Posted November 21, 2012 Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 What, you mean it didn't happen? Have I missed something? I idly read something about the entire landmass disappearing altogether as part of the 2012 shenanigans. I was under the impression the geographical country of Japan did still exist at this exact juncture of time/space. But what do I know? Anything could happen in the next 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 21, 2012 Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 I thought Japan was set to be swallowed by the sea sometime soon anyway*? . You may find this astounding (I do) but 17% of useable land (ie not mountains of which Japan is 72%) WAS swallowed/reclaimed BY the sea. Much of that 17% SUNK and wont be coming back. The expected nankai quake could be far more devastating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 You may find this astounding (I do) but 17% of useable land (ie not mountains of which Japan is 72%) WAS swallowed/reclaimed BY the sea. Much of that 17% SUNK and wont be coming back. The expected nankai quake could be far more devastating. Hmm When did that happen, J. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 Hmm When did that happen, J. ? 3.11, quake and Tsunami. Land subsidence Land subsidence and soil liquefaction near Shin-Urayasu Station elevator shaft Geospatial Information Authority of Japan reported land subsidence on the height of triangulation station measured by GPS from previous value on 14 April 2011.[160] Miyako, Iwate – 0.50 m (1.64 ft) Yamada, Iwate – 0.53 m (1.73 ft) Ōtsuchi, Iwate – 0.35 m (1.14 ft)[161] Kamaishi, Iwate – 0.66 m (2.16 ft) Ōfunato, Iwate – 0.73 m (2.39 ft) Rikuzentakata, Iwate – 0.84 m (2.75 ft) Kesennuma, Miyagi – 0.74 m (2.42 ft) Minamisanriku, Miyagi – 0.69 m (2.26 ft) Oshika Peninsula, Miyagi – 1.2 m (3.93 ft)[161] Ishinomaki, Miyagi – 0.78 m (2.55 ft) Higashimatsushima, Miyagi – 0.43 m (1.41 ft) Iwanuma, Miyagi – 0.47 m (1.54 ft) Sōma, Fukushima – 0.29 m (0.95 ft) Scientists say that the subsidence is permanent. As a result, the communities in question are now more susceptible to flooding during high tides Geography of Japan From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Geography of Japan Region East Asia Coordinates 36°N 138°E Area Ranked 62nd 377,923.14 km2 (145,916.94 sq mi) 99.18% land 0.82% water . There are also 2,456 islands,[2] including Okinawa, and islets, some inhabited and others uninhabited. In total, as of 2006, Japan's territory is 377,923.1 km2 (145,916.9 sq mi), of which 374,834 km2 (144,724 sq mi) is land and 3,091 km2 (1,193 sq mi) water. This makes Japan's total area slightly smaller than the U.S. state of Montana, and slightly larger than Finland. Location: Eastern Asia, island chain between the North Pacific Ocean and the Sea of Japan, east of the Korean Peninsula. Map references: Asia Area: total: 377,835 km² land: 374,744 km² water: 3,091 km² . Climate: varies from tropical in south to cool temperate in north Terrain: mostly rugged and mountainous Natural resources: small deposits of coal, oil, iron and minerals. Major fishing industry. Land use: arable land: 11% permanent crops: 1% permanent pastures: 2% forests and woodland: 68%[3] other: 18% (1993 est.) Irrigated land: 27,820 km² (1993 est.) 73% of Japan is mountains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 So.. Japan is .377,923.14 km2 (145,916.94 sq mi), of which 14% is useable/growable/livable-ie so very little. 17% of that was lost in the quake and the tsunami. I am not sure if this includes contaminated land from the Fukushima fallout. The affected coastline was 500 odd miles long and in some places the waters travelled 10km onshore, with max heights of 39m. That's not a typo. Geophysical effects The quake moved portions of northeastern Japan by as much as 2.4 m (7.9 ft) closer to North America,[18][19] making portions of Japan's landmass wider than before.[19] Portions of Japan closest to the epicenter experienced the largest shifts.[19] A 400 km (250 mi) stretch of coastline dropped vertically by 0.6 m (2.0 ft), allowing the tsunami to travel farther and faster onto land.[19] One early estimate suggested that the Pacific plate may have moved westward by up to 20 m (66 ft),[63] and another early estimate put the amount of slippage at as much as 40 m (130 ft).[64] On 6 April the Japanese coast guard said that the quake shifted the seabed near the epicenter 24 meters (79 ft) and elevated the seabed off the coast of Miyagi prefecture by 3 meters.[65] A report by the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, published in Science on 2 December 2011, concluded that the seabed in the area between the epicenter and the Japan Trench moved 50 meters east-southeast and rose about 7 meters as a result of the quake. The report also stated that the quake had caused several major landslides on the seabed in the affected area.[66] Soil liquefaction in Koto, Tokyo The earthquake shifted the Earth's axis by estimates of between 10 cm (4 in) and 25 cm (10 in).[18][19][20] This deviation led to a number of small planetary changes, including the length of a day, the tilt of the Earth, and the Chandler wobble.[20] The speed of the Earth's rotation increased, shortening the day by 1.8 microseconds due to the redistribution of Earth's mass.[67] The axial shift was caused by the redistribution of mass on the Earth's surface, which changed the planet's moment of inertia. Because of conservation of angular momentum, such changes of inertia result in small changes to the Earth's rate of rotation.[68] These are expected changes[20] for an earthquake of this magnitude.[18][67] Soil liquefaction was evident in areas of reclaimed land around Tokyo, particularly in Urayasu,[69][70] Chiba City, Funabashi, Narashino (all in Chiba Prefecture) and in the Koto, Edogawa, Minato, Chūō, and Ōta Wards of Tokyo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 Wow. I did not realise that so much was lost in the incident. My prayers go out to the people of Japan Clif High believes the planet is growing. But even if he is right, it does not mean that all countries, or even most countries are gaining land Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Open land can solve housing shortage, says minister Increasing the amount of developed land by a third would address the housing shortage, according to Planning Minister Nick Boles. He told BBC Newsnight building on another 2-3% of the land in England - bringing the total to about 12% - would "solve the housing problem." http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-20510692 But then have a look all at the highest rated comments. Nimby extremists are out in force. They really don't get it, the ignorance is shocking . Most of these people will probably never sell their beloved houses, so any fall in price that might occur with a massive building programme wouldn't actually affect them. Indeed, it would let their children afford a house without having to tap the bank of mum and dad (i.e them). Then, for those wanting to move up the ladder, their next house would be cheaper. It would free up money for the real economy, instead of ever increasing interest (+ skim) payments to the banksters as we've seen over the last decade or so as prices rose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Haven't people in the UK yet worked out that the Boomers are going to Downsize?? Why stay in London, when you can get something nicer elsewhere for half the price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Haven't people in the UK yet worked out that the Boomers are going to Downsize?? Why stay in London, when you can get something nicer elsewhere for half the price? Because they don't tend to do that here. Boomers are quite happy to sit in their big houses, with their big gold plated pensions. (Plus they think London is the greatest place in the world) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Increasing London property prices fuelled by offshore buyers The Finance Pages-by Jon Li-20 hours ago Tax evasion hits new high in Britain ...as rich overseas property buyers are focusing their purchases on prime central London property by avoiding taxes, thus making huge profits which in turn drives up property prices, according to an investigation led by the Guardian and the Washington based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). The Guradian’s investigation along with ICIJ covered nearly 60 sample premises which showed an alarming number of buyers acquiring more number of luxury homes in London. While some buyers lived abroad, some were dwelling in the UK itself, while building property empires using artificial practices such as avoiding inheritance tax, capital gains tax and stamp duty. Since 2009, the UK property prices have risen 49% in prime central London, which is five times more than the rest of the UK, according to estate agents Knight Frank. Guardian reports that in 2011 alone, more than £7bn of offshore money flooded into potentially tax-exempt purchases of UK houses, flats and office blocks. The UK government allows property buyers to hide their identities on the official Land Registry. Moreover, overseas entities do not pay any tax on the proceeds of property speculation, unlike resident Britons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Because they don't tend to do that here. Boomers are quite happy to sit in their big houses, with their big gold plated pensions. (Plus they think London is the greatest place in the world) Haha They may change their minds, if they are late in the great exodus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Haha They may change their minds, if they are late in the great exodus Yep, come the revolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinecu Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Two articles giving a very different picture for London.... http://www.home.co.uk/guides/news/story.htm?selling_your_home_beware_unrealistic_asking_prices_says_london_agency http://www.home.co.uk/guides/news/story.htm?uk_landlords_should_consider_a_reduction_of_15_20_per_cent_off_current_rent_asking_prices_warns_age Rents and prices too high? This is the agents talking.....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 28, 2012 Report Share Posted November 28, 2012 Two articles giving a very different picture for London.... http://www.home.co.u...s_london_agency http://www.home.co.u...rices_warns_age Rents and prices too high? This is the agents talking.....! Hmm. Seems like they are trying to give a big hard shove to the normal seasonal dip: Lynn Hilton, Partner for Residential Lettings at Cluttons, said: 'Affordability is now central to the performance of London’s rental market. Landlords cannot achieve the rents they were getting twelve months ago and must now be far more realistic with rent reductions of around 15-20 per cent in order to secure a let. 'Despite a small turn around in rents during the third quarter, our evidence shows that rents have begun retreating once more, highlighting the need for landlords to be realistic in their approach and expectations. Sensible landlords need to accept these reductions to minimise void periods. Greater choice across Central London is no doubt adding to tenants’ bargaining power.' I suppose the landlords should suggest that the agents be "realistic with their commissions", and cut them by 15-20% below normal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinecu Posted November 29, 2012 Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 Seems that City job losses are to blame... http://www.rman.co.u...ondon-5848.html Perhaps the great financial services show finally over and Britain will have to get making things again! (but not houses!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 29, 2012 Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 WHY BUY - when Rents are Falling ??? Rents in prime central London are falling as job losses bite in the City – but despite this, more rentals are being agreed as would-be buyers become tenants instead. According to Knight Frank, rents fell 0.5% last month, taking the annual rate of decline to 2.7%. News that UBS is to cut up to 3,000 jobs in its London offices, combined with similar moves by Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, mean the downward trend is likely to continue, says Knight Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoldAsBrass Posted November 29, 2012 Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 Haven't people in the UK yet worked out that the Boomers are going to Downsize?? Why stay in London, when you can get something nicer elsewhere for half the price? Obviously just an anecdotal observation. I don't know that many people - but quite a few people I have spoken to over the last few months are not downsizing - they are making arrangements to share their accommodation with their kids. Either by extending/adapting/going in to the loft etc. to create separate(ish - not enough for 2 or more council taxes) or by building what are technically 'mobile' homes in the garden. My wife and I are about to apply for planning for a big double storey extension on the side of the house - about 1000 sq ft (which will incorporate one of the pair of garages) which we will move in to. The house will fairly neatly divide into two giving both of our sons their own roughly 1000 sq ft each of 2 bed accommodation. I've mentioned this plan before, on here, but I only repeat it now because it is remarkable how many people I mention my plans to and they are either already considering something similar or, next time I see them, say they're giving the matter serious consideration. We are young baby boomers - just 60 - so most of my peers, like me, have youngish adult children who have missed the property ladder - or are too young to get on it. People 10 years older than us seem to have managed to offload their kids - nearly everyone I know still has their kids living with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted November 29, 2012 Report Share Posted November 29, 2012 It sounds like a smart move. If you do a good job with that, you may get back all the costs when you sell it. But cashing out, eliminating all mortgage debt, and putting some cash in your bank account can be a smart move too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted November 30, 2012 Report Share Posted November 30, 2012 Nationwide out, still down slightly. House prices are still falling slowly, according to the latest figures from the Nationwide building society. Its latest monthly survey says average prices have been unchanged this past month at just under £164,000, and are 1.2% lower than in November last year. http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-20509192 My wife and I are about to apply for planning for a big double storey extension on the side of the house - about 1000 sq ft (which will incorporate one of the pair of garages) which we will move in to. The house will fairly neatly divide into two giving both of our sons their own roughly 1000 sq ft each of 2 bed accommodation. Wow, what a great idea (as long as you all get on that is) you guys will be like the Waltons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Posted November 30, 2012 Report Share Posted November 30, 2012 Not sure I would be ecstatic about living next door to my inlaws.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted November 30, 2012 Report Share Posted November 30, 2012 Not sure I would be ecstatic about living next door to my inlaws.... Same as, (although they're good fun for a few days). However, it'd be a nughtmare living next to my father! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted December 2, 2012 Report Share Posted December 2, 2012 Odey sees possible House Price crash City superman Crispin Odey predicted the recession, was once Rupert Murdoch’s son-in-law, manages $5 billion of assets and has a serious problem with the PM. David Cameron is not a leader,” says Crispin Odey, the City financier and Conservative Party donor. “He doesn’t understand power and he doesn’t use it.” These are strong words for a life-long supporter of the party. But he doesn’t stop there. “George [Osborne],” he says, “we hate more than Dave.” By “we” he means the City. And when he follows these unflinching statements up with “David’s a decent person and I know him personally,” it’s clear that he is talking business. And Odey knows about business. This is the man who predicted the recession, and here, in the pink art-lined boardroom of his oak-panelled offices, he delivers another devastating blow: “Property is ludicrously expensive,” he says. “House prices are right at the top of their cycle. I think they could crash. I’m not saying it’ll happen immediately, but I do think they can drop by half.” . . . Can he see a way out of the current economic gloom? “We have got to get the banks working again. That means the end of bashing the bankers. If there is no credit growth there is no economic growth. The last time we were in a depression was the 1930s, and what got us out was cheap money. We need a zero interest rate and a housing boom.” And so house prices need to come down too? “House prices are not stable. They have a cycle like everything else. America has understood this much earlier than the UK. There, house prices have already fallen by 50 per cent and they are affordable. It goes back to thinking like a rich man: you have to take the long view.” === /more: http://www.standard....it-8335027.html I met him several years ago, and had conversations about him and his team about working as a Commodity-related fund manager. In fact, he was going to set up a meeting with his wife, saying: "I trust her intuition better than my own when it comes to hiring new people." It looked rather promising. But just then his huge trade on Gilt bonds began to unwind, it quickly became clear he was not going to hire any new people for a while. He's a very bright guy and highly successful, so we should pay attention to his housing call, I believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted December 2, 2012 Report Share Posted December 2, 2012 He's a very bright guy and highly successful, so we should pay attention to his housing call, I believe So what do you think about his erm.. "solution"? (''I'll put it back to full size text, in case it gets skipped over ) Should we "pay attention to " this? . . .Can he see a way out of the current economic gloom? “We have got to get the banks working again. That means the end of bashing the bankers. If there is no credit growth there is no economic growth. The last time we were in a depression was the 1930s, and what got us out was cheap money. We need a zero interest rate and a housing boom.” He's a bankster FFS, he's gonna hate anyone that doesn't let them get all their own way, all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wee Jinky Posted December 2, 2012 Report Share Posted December 2, 2012 How can you listen to someone who says housing is ridiculously expensive which could drop by half (in a time of zero% interest rates) and the solution is a housing boom with zero percent interest rates He's as mad as a box of frogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now