Oddbean

@3967703f It's all about location, location, location. I'd definitely argue that someone with any kind of home in a safe spot, free from the worst that climate change offers has a slight advantage. Problem is, where is that location? But yea, I would not want to live in Florida, Louisiana, or NYC no matter the house.

@3967703f Currently I live in an RV. (Which I own) having a sticks and bricks home is nice in the right location but we lost our home to my partner's mom's medical bills and nursing care costs. Right now we're chasing weather of course. We like the freedom, moving wherever we want (we're retired) but there's absolutely no safety net. Moving all the time is a little daunting... but moving wherever whenever we want is nice 🤷🏻‍♀️

@3967703f There are many factors: - When will capitalism stop working in your area? If capitalism continues to function, you must play with monopoly money or risk homelessness and starvation. If it stops functioning, then financial concerns cease, how will you secure living space, water, & food then? - What are your financial terms? Getting lucky with cheap rent or a cheap mortgage can tip the scales. - How likely are fascists to take over your location, driving you into exile or worse?

@3967703f It depends entirely on where the home is I guess. I'm ok here in the middle of England and high enough up too that even with maximum sea-level rise my house would not be underwater. In an ideal world I would be living in a large EV bus of some sort, moving around and being much more independent and self-sufficient;

@3967703f It's scary as heck. Most home owners use all their resources for the purchase. Good insurance can help mitigate some of the risk. In a disaster area both the renter and homeowner face the same risk of loss of life or personal effects that have intangible sentimental value. So weighing it out, an owner would have insurance to remedy the situation and provide alternative living arrangements during the restoration phase. But they would still have the same payments and perhaps rising insurance costs. They would have property to sell afterwards, but perhaps at a loss. But still something. With insurance companies pulling out of states they are saying the risk is not affordable anymore. A renter with insurance only has personal effects coverage. I am not sure if it would cover temporary housing if displaced. The renter likely would be competing for a reduced number of rentals with no expectations or control of getting their home rebuilt. Tough call that wealthy people don't worry about.

@3967703f I was able to visit Cedar Island Virginia before the last of the great vacation houses sank into the sea. I doubt this will be everyone’s experience, but it’s definitely where things are going #climate #housing #virginia https://www.bayjournal.com/news/climate_change/cedar-island-vacation-homes-vanish-vanquished-by-rising-water/article_2bc7cde9-78ab-5197-8b01-353d78428739.html

@3967703f What scares me about the region where we live in Virginia is how little water the clay soils absorb. I’ve joked with a friend who works in managing construction sediment that paving the land might increase water absorption here.