Ideal ski towns for the future factoring in all issues?

[BenedictGomez]

Climate change will fix us up real good. The human economic growth model never fails to eventually fail. Highly successful Civilizations collapsed because of climate shifts before.

I fail to see how the earth warming a few (literally) degrees over the next 100 years will have much of an impact. And even that's assuming the woefully historically (thus far) failed climate models are correct on a go-forward basis. When the field goal kicker continues to miss 35 yard field goals, I tend not to just assume he's going to hit the next one from 55 yards out. And if anything, I'd think it would make more of the planet hospitable to mammalian life on a percent basis. Yes, I know, narrative violation.

 

[deadheadskier]

I think the fact most of the posters on this board are from New England warps the perception on this topic a bit.

There are 4 states in America where natural decrease (i.e. deaths exceed births) is occurring in 100% of counties, and 3 are in New England (Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island). Vermont & Connecticut aren't much better at like 90%. Compare that to the midwest or west where not a single state has that dynamic.

This doesn't surprise me at all. I'm guessing the two biggest factors are cost of living and participation in religion. Same reasons the birth rates are low in Western Europe.

New England is a very expensive place to live. For that reason, people here tend to wait longer before becoming parents and establish themselves financially. Statistically people here have their first child at a later age than elsewhere. You start later, you stop sooner. I had my kids at 39 and 43. My wife is 7 years younger. Had we started when I was 35, we may have had a third.

New England is also the least religious region of the country. Religious people have more kids for a number of reasons. They use contraception less and are more pro-life. Some also believe having a large family is what God wants.

 

[raisingarizona]

I fail to see how the earth warming a few (literally) degrees over the next 100 years will have much of an impact. And even that's assuming the woefully historically (thus far) failed climate models are correct on a go-forward basis. When the field goal kicker continues to miss 35 yard field goals, I tend not to just assume he's going to hit the next one from 55 yards out. And if anything, I'd think it would make more of the planet hospitable to mammalian life on a percent basis. Yes, I know, narrative violation.

You are definitely “failing” to see it.

 

[Former Sunday Rivah Rat]

The Carbon Nazi's always conveniently leave out the fact that CO 2 is actually good for plant/crop growth. They pump it into greenhouses:
"In a greenhouse supplemented with CO 2, a dramatic increase in the growth of plants can be observed with increasing temperature. Supplemental CO 2 increases the optimum temperature requirement of a crop. This increases production even at higher temperature, which is not possible at the ambient CO 2 level."
Climate Change is another long con that has been played by the elites, most of them with a personal carbon footprint the size of a small nation. Think about Al Gore: "Snow will be a thing" of the many past preditions that long ago failed to materialize.

 

[Harvey]

Do they have Bicknell's Thrush out west?

 

[Hawk]

I had a feeling that is would devolve into a climate change debate. I have my beliefs on this topic and it is based on what I see in my travels and what I hear from my geeky ocean and meteorolgist data friends. There is change for sure and here is the sad truth. The grand majority of people don't care, don't want to understand and fight against it. It will take soemthing like a fisheries collape or massive crop failure to make them at least understand there is something wrong. The truth is, if it is not happening this second, well then there is no problem right? I believe that we will start to see things go bad in our generation but our kids will bear the brunt of it. So when shortages start to happen and prices go up and hit people in the pocket, they might start to pay attention. It's sad but I am afraid it is comming. Nothing I can do about it. People will deny there is any kind of problem because it is inconvienent. Then they will blame the rest of the world and say it is there fault. But we are all in this together on this planet and there is no getting out of that.

 

[KustyTheKlown]

hopefully next time river rat's house gets washed down a river with the 1000 year floods

 

[NYDB]

Algore!

 

[BenedictGomez]

Do they have Bicknell's Thrush out west?

Negative.

I'll need to retire my signature!

 

[kbroderick]

Do they have Bicknell's Thrush out west?

No, but they do have sage grouse, grizzly bears, bighorn sheep, and other species whose continued existence can impact ski-area operations and backcountry access.

 

[Harvey]

Negative.

I'll need to retire my signature!

View attachment 58931

What endangered species will you use to make your point?

 

[Hawk]

FSRR, That is two threads that you reference Saul Alinsky. Did you actually study that is school or did you pick that up on some Right leaning blog or site. His "rules" have been poping up more and more. It's kind of an phenomenon. It's interesting how certain groups have gravitated to his book.

 

[IceEidolon]

There are a lot of WFH refugees going out of the big cities, sure, but it doesn't seem like enough to drag urban housing prices down much. And then you have desirable but constrained locations, like many ski towns, or "ten minute walk to a subway station", where there's not any flat left to build on but there's more people wanting to move there.

In those cases supply and demand would suggest building more dense housing to take advantage of the high demand, but in many cases cities and towns forbid that. And they end up paying substantially more to maintain roads and plumbing to more sprawl, instead of approving limited densification. Then, when someone finally has the money to push through a development, it's the kind of large project that really doesn't fit the neighborhood character because that's the only sort of project with multimillion dollar backing. Instead you could have had a pair of ADUs here, a duplex conversion there, two neighboring lots built into a triplex or a five unit mini apartment building, and spread the change over twenty or thirty years, in response to opportunities and market demand. No wonder people are opposed to densification, the only kind that actually gets to happen is an obnoxious half block timber frame econoluxury apartment, or a sure'nuff condo tower if you're very urban.

 

[Edd]

At whatever point owning a home and real estate in general became a “path to wealth”, things got fucked. A home is something people (especially parents) actually need and the current economic model of fucking the buyer as much as possible seems not good for society.

 

[Hawk]

Edd it's simple, realestate has outperformed the markets over the last 50 years. Smart money has gone to realestate. I have many frients that own several realestate holdings that are their retirment plan. Actuctually the pandemic boom flushed some of them out. They couldn't resist.

 

[Hawk]

I am not sure whatyou mean about fucking the buyer. You sell your house to the highest qualified bidder. if you over pay you are fucking yourself.

 

[Edd]

Edd it's simple, realestate has outperformed the markets over the last 50 years. Smart money has gone to realestate. I have many frients that own several realestate holdings that are their retirment plan. Actuctually the pandemic boom flushed some of them out. They couldn't resist.

Sure, it’s simple but my point stands.

 

[Edd]

I am not sure whatyou mean about fucking the buyer. You sell your house to the highest qualified bidder. if you over pay you are fucking yourself.

Housing is cosmically overpriced in most of NH. It doesn’t make sense for many people. The Boomers and older gens paid far less of their net worth to own a home. That’s fucking the buyer.

 

[Hawk]

I can understand your frustration but what are people susposed to do. Discount your selling price because you feel bad and want to sell to the nice couple with the 2 kids. That's just doesn't make sence. I worked my ass off renovating my first house for 20 years. We got a nice return on investment. Our timing was good. Was I susposed to discount my price to give someone a chance? Who would deserve that most. I would have interview people. Nope the process is the process. I worked and saved and skimped and then I took my profit. No hard feeleings.

 

[Edd]

I can understand your frustration but what are people susposed to do. Discount your selling price because you feel bad and want to sell to the nice couple with the 2 kids. That's just doesn't make sence. I worked my ass off renovating my first house for 20 years. We got a nice return on investment. Our timing was good. Was I susposed to discount my price to give someone a chance? Who would deserve that most. I would have interview people. Nope the process is the process. I worked and saved and skimped and then I took my profit. No hard feeleings.

Good for you. This goes back to what I was saying about real estate being a path to wealth. It’s a thing families need. The cost used to be reasonable and now it’s unreasonable. Does that make sense?