California: not a good place to buy a home.

[Peter]

UCERF Earthquake Probabilities

According to the new forecast, California has a 99.7% chance of having a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake during the next 30 years (see Figure 1). The likelihood of an even more powerful quake of magnitude 7.5 or greater in the next 30 years is 46%. Such a quake is more likely to occur in the southern half of the state (37% chance in 30 years) than in the northern half (15% chance in 30 years) (see Figure 2).

The probability of a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake over the next 30 years striking the greater Los Angeles area is 67%, and in the San Francisco Bay Area it is 63%, similar to previous WGCEP estimates (see Figure 3). For the entire California region, the fault with the highest probability of generating at least one magnitude 6.7 quake or larger is the southern San Andreas (59% in the next 30 years; see Figure 4). For northern California, the most likely source of such earthquakes is the Hayward-Rodgers Creek Fault (31% in the next 30 years). Events of this size can be deadly, as shown by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake (magnitude 6.9) and 1994 Northridge earthquake (magnitude 6.7).

Earthquake probabilities for many parts of the state are similar to those in previous studies, but the new probabilities calculated for the Elsinore and San Jacinto Faults in southern California are about half those previously determined. For the far northwestern part of the State, a major source of earthquakes is the offshore 750-mile-long Cascadia Subduction Zone, the southern part of which extends about 150 miles into California. For the next 30 years there is a 10% probability of a magnitude 8 to 9 quake somewhere along that zone. Such quakes occur about once every 500 years on average.

The UCERF model includes the concept that earthquake likelihoods change with time. A fault that has ruptured in a recent large earthquake is less likely to produce another quake in the near future, because tectonic stress has not had time to build back up. Likewise, a fault that last ruptured a long time ago is more likely to produce an earthquake, because the stress on the fault has had time to re-accumulate. The faults with elevated probabilities for an earthquake include the southern San Andreas and Hayward-Rodgers Creek Faults (see Figure 5), although major quakes on these faults may still be decades away.

[ozymandias]

California is a nice place to visit, but, I wouldn't want to live there!  And not because of the earthquakes either.  Property values are astronomical and a lot of nutjobs keep flocking there to try to be famous.   

[Blasted]

New York City 

[Sophgay]

I still want to move there
Doubt I'll ever be able to afford it though

[Peter]

I predict that when the next major earthquake hits and flattens a major metropolitan area, people will be shocked and someone will say "Nobody could have predicted it".

[ozymandias]

I predict that when the next major earthquake hits and flattens a major metropolitan area, people will be shocked and someone will say "Nobody could have predicted it".

And you would be right and I'll just  and feel that the human herd needed culling.   

[Parts]

How about the NYC metro area they say it could happen

[ozymandias]

How about the NYC metro area they say it could happen

The possibility is slight and would mostly affect NYC because of the pop. density and lack of foresight in the construction.  Connecticut should be spared the worst.  But, I emphasize the possibility is slight/remote and not worth losing sleep over.

[Natalia Evans]

I still want to move there
Doubt I'll ever be able to afford it though

Thanks to so many empty houses there, the value goes down because the banks lost money so the houses would be cheaper for people with low income to buy.

[ozymandias]

Spokane is a pretty city, the two times that I have been there.

[Natalia Evans]

And it's cheap but the B&J neighborhood is pretty expensive because of the river down there. The houses are in the $300,000 range and they're all farm houses or country houses, they're like cottages. That's why I see $300,000 expensive. The highest price I seen for a house in Spokane was in the $600,000 range because it had the whole view of the river and it was in Browne's Addition. But the rest off the houses I have seen are in the $100,000 range. But I did see a house up for $85,000 but it said to bring a hammer meaning it needed work.

[Blasted]

I will live under a bridge in a twig hut.

In Paris.

[ozymandias]

And it's cheap but the B&J neighborhood is pretty expensive because of the river down there. The houses are in the $300,000 range and they're all farm houses or country houses, they're like cottages. That's why I see $300,000 expensive. The highest price I seen for a house in Spokane was in the $600,000 range because it had the whole view of the river and it was in Browne's Addition. But the rest off the houses I have seen are in the $100,000 range. But I did see a house up for $85,000 but it said to bring a hammer meaning it needed work.

When your talking waterfront property, your always talking about EXPENSIVE.  Second only to "Mountain View" properties.  Thats the same all over this country.  Even though a river could flood.  We're still talking expensive realty. 

When I was in California, my friend took me on a motorcycle trip through the hills outside LA.  Prime Real Estate I might add.  What did I see, homes burned due to the yearly wildfires, homes destroyed due to the seasonal mudslides because the wildfires destroyed the vegetation holding the soil to the hillsides.  But, funniest and saddest of all was a trip down a canyon to see a lone fireplace that had been carved into a rock cliff, I mean carved literally, chimney and all, that was all that was left of a home that some rich guy built.  Unfortunately for him, his house was at a bend in the canyon downslope from a burned wilderness area.  And his home was literally at the point where a mudslide came down and hit the home as cleanly as a sniper hits their victim.

The house was smack in the center of a bullseye.  Nothing was left except a hand chiseled fireplace and chimney in a rock face.  YET, people were still paying big bucks to build or buy homes in this area.  But, at least nobody bought the property of the unfortunate house.  At least not yet.  This was 20+ years ago.  That may have changed.

Spokane in summer is quite hot, albeit a dry heat and being  near the mountains it cools off fairly quickly at night.

[Natalia Evans]

And they get lot of snow in the winter it seems like.

[Parts]

How about the NYC metro area they say it could happen

The possibility is slight and would mostly affect NYC because of the pop. density and lack of foresight in the construction.  Connecticut should be spared the worst.  But, I emphasize the possibility is slight/remote and not worth losing sleep over.

Not losing sleep, waiting the worst my area would probably  get are bridge collapses and it would boost the building industry which is sluggish