[GHung]

Dohboi you stated that it was past time for low lying coastal areas to be evacuated. But the logistics and expenses would be tremendous. I see more of an attrition scenario whereby individually people just make the decision to pack up and leave. A coordinated statewide undertaking to evacuate in a state like Florida is still not a scenario I see happening soon

As long as the rest of us keep paying the costs, most people will return, and newbies who dream of living at the shore will come. North Carolina has been hit many times, yet the coastal population continues to increase; development even more concentrated. Good money after bad, and, here in North Carolina, some of that money is mine, and the resources devoted to rebuilding infrastructure are State and federal dollars that could be devoted to other, more permanent things. Yet this is a state that passed a law to prevent coastal municipalities from considering sea level rise (and climate change) in their planning and zoning.

We're not alone. Since Andrew devastated South Florida, the population there has increased significantly. Profit trumps common sense every time.

This will be the third major flooding event in 2016 for the North Carolina coastal plain IN THE PAST MONTH: Hermine; Julia; now Mathew. But rebuild they will.

[onlooker]

"and the resources devoted to rebuilding infrastructure are State and federal dollars that could be devoted to other, more permanent things. "
As in relocating people The level of denial related to the matters we discuss here is still so widespread and prevalent

[Subjectivist]

That film Rising Tides we talked about not long ago pointed out socialized costs lead to bad spending decisions.

[GHung]

"and the resources devoted to rebuilding infrastructure are State and federal dollars that could be devoted to other, more permanent things. "
As in relocating people The level of denial related to the matters we discuss here is still so widespread and prevalent

That denial is financially motivated. LOTS of money being poured into these things, post-event, and powerful people with connections go after it. A guy I used to work for moved his development efforts to the coast where he built new homes on a section where older homes had been flooded/condemned. He got those lots for a bargain, but claims; "we build them a little better these days". Of course, he isn't billed for the rebuilt roads, bridges, and other infrastructure necessary for putting homes in a flood zone.

Disaster capitalism (extortion) at its finest.

[dohboi]

" the logistics and expenses would be tremendous."

The expense will be more if it is not planned, and on top of that the death and dismemberment will be much greater.

Even though slr is gradual, it's effects, on top of those of GW, do not occur gradually. Heat builds up, and there is not land falling hurricane for years, the 'nuisance' slr making life just slightly more annoying, but usually not enough to make anyone move.

Then suddenly a monster hurricane comes along on a new/rare path and wipes away much of the infrastructure along the coast, and any who didn't evacuate along with it. Now most of that material cannot be re-purposed, much effort must be put in to rescuing those who did not evacuate, and of course those killed by the storm are gone for ever.

But of course, time and GW will eventually do the job of 'evacuating the coast' eventually (especially if we stop insuring the damn coastal properties). But it won't be in a very pretty way.

[onlooker]

That denial is financially motivated--For those who stand to make a profit. The rest more like fear and/or ignorance derived denial. However one sees it , the common thread is Denial of how fast and how bad things will be in the future. Which ties into the elections , whereby politicians reassure us they will make things better into the future

[onlooker]

The expense will be more if it is not planned, and on top of that the death and dismemberment will be much greater.

And that is what is being denied by many

[Ibon]

Just curious if this near brush with disaster has made you even more eager to offload your Florida property, and if you have any insights into what others in the are might be thinking along those lines.

This event has reinforced a bit the decision to sell. There are 6 million folks living in South Florida all concentrated along the eastern coastal area. Development is restricted within a narrow band along the coast because the Everglades water conservation area is a vast saw grass marsh contained behind a raised berm. Unlike other areas there is no dry land inland where development can shift westward with rising sea levels.

For those wanting to stay here long term the main security they have is the asset inertia in place. There are trillions of dollars of infrastructure and there will be billions invested in pumps and dykes to preserve the value of these assets. This will extend the inevitable for several decades.

Our properties are not insured for wind and hurricane damage because we own the properties out right. You cant get a mortgage here without hurricane insurance. half of the homeowners here who outright own their homes are like us and dont have hurricane insurance. If Mathew had been a direct hit here the economic impact would have been a game changer. Imagine all the damaged homes not insured and then the insurance rates skyrocketing.

One of the reason we want to exit is that we do not have this asset insured and insurance would cut into the rental earnings to the point to make it not really viable.

Everyone' decision to leave or stay has many considerations. A big reason also why we want to sell is that we cannot give these properties the love and attention they deserve now that our project in Panama has become so busy and taking all our time.

I do not consider sea level rise a real issue for leaving coastal property actually in many parts of the country even here in Florida. Remember that the demand to live here is still high, the population remains pretty ambigious about sea level rise and the mitigations will be formidable to preserve the assets here. Long term futile but for the mid term, the next several decades, there is no real risk in my view in staying in a coastal property unless you are right at high tide on the beach.

[GHung]

Ibon: "...the population remains pretty ambigious about sea level rise and the mitigations (socialised costs) will be formidable to preserve the assets here."

There. Clarified that for you, Ibon.

[Outcast_Searcher]

For those wanting to stay here long term the main security they have is the asset inertia in place. There are trillions of dollars of infrastructure and there will be billions invested in pumps and dykes to preserve the value of these assets. This will extend the inevitable for several decades.

That's true, as long as there isn't a sudden SLR rise due to something major breaking off.

The serious discussions by scientists, geologists, etc. I've seen (and I'm no expert by any means) seem to indicate (from my layman's perspective) that friction from bedrock should likely prevent a very sudden change of a LARGE magnitude -- at least as things stand now.

I wonder if that outlook will shift as warming accelerates (via feedback mechanisms), or as more is learned.

...

By the way, I am NOT opining what anyone should do - just mentioning one potential risk in that plan.

Disclosure: (My cowardly body sits at about 700 ft. above sea level where there are few major storms, floods, earthquakes, or truly severe temperature events. That's not an accident. Caution doesn't make for adventure movies, but it does help avoid the stress of dealing with "interesting times".) The major sudden event risk I face is if the New Madrid fault line lets loose another "big one". As my aging body reminds me, one can't prevent everything.

[dohboi]

"we do not have this asset insured and insurance would cut into the rental earnings to the point to make it not really viable. "

Good point. Sounds like many others are in the same shaky boat.

As to the other stuff, it is my humble opinion that those most in denial now will be the ones at some point in the greatest panic at some point. Where that tipping point comes is anyone's guess. But I would not say that, just because much of the population now is rather complacent about slr issues, that they will stay that way forever. That's just my ignorant guess, though.

[Tanada]

Perversely this hurricane may make it easier for Ibon to sell his Florida property for a good profit. There are a certain type of buyers out there who believe unconsciously that because the property was perfectly fine in this storm event it has some quality of immunity to damage. That makes no logical sense at all, but I have seen this effect play out. For example if a neighborhood is struck by a tornado and the house next to a destroyed home is put up for sale the mere fact that the next house over was destroyed but not that house causes some people to believe it is a 'lucky house'.

[Ibon]

Perversely this hurricane may make it easier for Ibon to sell his Florida property for a good profit. There are a certain type of buyers out there who believe unconsciously that because the property was perfectly fine in this storm event it has some quality of immunity to damage. That makes no logical sense at all, but I have seen this effect play out. For example if a neighborhood is struck by a tornado and the house next to a destroyed home is put up for sale the mere fact that the next house over was destroyed but not that house causes some people to believe it is a 'lucky house'.

It's funny isn't it. This might be true. Something else. One of our homes is the 5th oldest residency in Fort Lauderdale. It was built in 1918 and will be 100 years old in two years. It still stands after a century with many hurricanes in that period.

There is something now that is making us consider to continue to do short term rentals for another couple years. There is an express train route Miami to Orlando called BrightLine. Here is a link

http://www.allaboardflorida.com/

It will be launched 2017 and will be high speed (Max 125MPH). The Fort Lauderdale station is now under construction and will be the first stop from Miami. This station is 1/4 mile from our rental home and there is a boom going on in the area with high density urban housing going up all around. We are sitting on this historical home right in the midst of this expansion and growth and it is forecasted that there will be an influx of home buyers from overcrowded Miami because the commute to Miami will be 22 minutes from The Fort Lauderdale station.

What do you guys think? I think there are still a lot more home buyers not thinking about sea level rise or hurricanes still on the mid term horizon. I think we still have time to wait a couple years and take advantage of the price gains forecasted. The home is very very unique in Fort Lauderdale. Here again is a link for anyone interested in seeing the home.

https://www.vrbo.com/428299

Another question now is what do we do with the proceeds if we sell? Stock market? I don't think so. We have a great property manager who looks after the place when we are in Panama. He just told us he can commit to another couple of years of managing the property.

This is typical Libra indecision on our part (my wife and I are both Libras) . We decide to sell, then back track. We are now reconsidering. Hurricane Mathew has came and went.

Remember that the damaging part of any hurricane is around the core and eye of the storm. Hurricane force winds only extend about 10 miles on either side of the eye. Afterwards you have mostly tropical storm forced winds. So we have a couple thousand miles of coastline from Florida to New York and what is really the probability that your property will fall in that 10-15 mile core area where it can get demolished or severely damaged? 100 years and still standing and we do not have wind insurance ??

[Tanada]

Sell now. Strike while the iron is hot, there is no guarantee the economy will still be chugging along in two years, not to mention there could be delays in the rail project. Once you have made the decision to sell for good and sufficient reasons back tracking is far more likely to be a mistake than an advantage. Take the profit you can get now instead of hoping for a bigger profit later, it is the bird in the hand is worth two in the bush principal at work.

[Ibon]

Sell now. Strike while the iron is hot, there is no guarantee the economy will still be chugging along in two years, not to mention there could be delays in the rail project. Once you have made the decision to sell for good and sufficient reasons back tracking is far more likely to be a mistake than an advantage. Take the profit you can get now instead of hoping for a bigger profit later, it is the bird in the hand is worth two in the bush principal at work.

Thanks T, appreciate your thoughts.