Let’s speculate effect of a massive earthquake on RE and CA economy.

[CA renter]

[quote=UCGal]If I recall, real estate prices dropped for about a year in the LA area after the Northridge earthquakes. I personally know two families who took advantage to purchase from freaked out people who decided the sunshine was not worth the earth quake risk and moved back to wherever they were from. One was in OC, one was in the Valley. Admittedly, this is anectdotal evidence.

It’s hard to say how much of the home price decline was due to the earthquake – there was a dip in housing prices during the same window for economic reasons. But the persons I know had been looking, and felt it was the time to get a bargain.

http://www.forecast-chart.com/estate-real-los-angeles.html%5B/quote%5D

Yep, the earthquake caused a lot of people to move back to their home states, if not from California. Even native Californians left.

As you said, prices were already going down, but I definitely think the Northridge earthquake caused them to drop further. Even I was starting to look for a home before the earthquake happened, and decided against it after the quake. It took me a few years to get the courage up to buy.

I think it really depends on how large and damaging the earthquake is. What many who’ve never experienced it can’t understand (until you’re in one) is how powerful a large quake is, and how frightening the aftershocks can be if you’re already traumatized by the first one. People were literally thrown from their beds, all of the furniture was knocked down (even some with furniture straps).

At my work, the roof of one of our warehouses collapsed. We often worked 24-hours/day, but had just finished the Christmas rush, so were back to two shifts. If not for that, we would have had multiple casualties. In another warehouse, the walls had separated from the roof, but the structure was still standing (it eventually ended up “red tagged” as well). It started raining a few days later, and it was like Niagara Falls, with water cascading down the interior of all the walls. All the employees were using shop vacs to suck up all the water that was flooding the inventory. Fun days…

IMHO, if there were a large, destructive earthquake in Southern California, prices would drop like a rock. So many people are already not paying and/or underwater, and the market is being 100% supported by the Fed/govt already, a large EQ would throw things over the edge.

[Eugene]

[quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.

[Eugene]

[quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.

[Eugene]

[quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.

[Eugene]

[quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.

[Eugene]

[quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.

[CA renter]

[quote=Eugene][quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.[/quote]

Haiti, Mexico, Pakistan…there are so many examples which show that CA earthquake codes absolutely benefit us, and exist for a reason. Not saying we’d all survive an 8.0, but there is no doubt in my mind that the EQ codes save lives.

[CA renter]

[quote=Eugene][quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.[/quote]

Haiti, Mexico, Pakistan…there are so many examples which show that CA earthquake codes absolutely benefit us, and exist for a reason. Not saying we’d all survive an 8.0, but there is no doubt in my mind that the EQ codes save lives.

[CA renter]

[quote=Eugene][quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.[/quote]

Haiti, Mexico, Pakistan…there are so many examples which show that CA earthquake codes absolutely benefit us, and exist for a reason. Not saying we’d all survive an 8.0, but there is no doubt in my mind that the EQ codes save lives.

[CA renter]

[quote=Eugene][quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.[/quote]

Haiti, Mexico, Pakistan…there are so many examples which show that CA earthquake codes absolutely benefit us, and exist for a reason. Not saying we’d all survive an 8.0, but there is no doubt in my mind that the EQ codes save lives.

[CA renter]

[quote=Eugene][quote=threadkiller]
Interesting that the last 2 posts promulgate 2 of the most popular myths when it comes to eathquakes. 1)that CA will drop into the ocean and 2)that building standards will keep damage to a minimum. What I just learned is that San Bernadino-Imperial counties have not had a big one in over 300 years and the probability of a big one in our lifetimes is like 97%. San Diego appears to be safe but Temecula not so much, lucky for El Centro I don’t think they have too many tall buildings there.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you consider my statement a myth. Building standards do keep damage to a minimum up to some point. Want proof? We had a 7.2 in the vicinity of San Andreas just this Easter. The scope of damage north of the border? “gas leaks, water main breaks, and collapsed chimneys and balconies were reported” (Wikipedia). Mexicali did not fare nearly as well. Neither the Northridge or the Loma Prieta earthquakes (6.7 and 6.9 in densely developed areas) resulted in large-scale damage to residential areas. In contrast, IIRC there was an earthquake of a similar magnitude in Italy last year that managed to depopulate a whole city and cause a few thousand fatalities. The difference between CA and Italian building codes.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t have any more faith in the building codes than you if it comes to a 8.0.[/quote]

Haiti, Mexico, Pakistan…there are so many examples which show that CA earthquake codes absolutely benefit us, and exist for a reason. Not saying we’d all survive an 8.0, but there is no doubt in my mind that the EQ codes save lives.

[patb]

actually Big quake is great.

supply is fonstrained

prices rise,

Look at new orleans.

[patb]

actually Big quake is great.

supply is fonstrained

prices rise,

Look at new orleans.

[patb]

actually Big quake is great.

supply is fonstrained

prices rise,

Look at new orleans.

[patb]

actually Big quake is great.

supply is fonstrained

prices rise,

Look at new orleans.

[Author]

Posts