Welcome!
VancouverPeak.com- jesse and Makaya are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic Sandbox. in the group Housing Data
- jesse posted an update: CMHC starts, completions and under construction in Vancouver […]
- The Ant started the forum topic BC Population Growth in the group Housing Data
- jesse and The Ant are now friends
- jesse and wreckonomics are now friends
- wreckonomics posted an update: New Year, New HPI. ”Selection Broadens and Demand Eases to […]
- Best place on meth and admin are now friends
- jesse and Best place on meth are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic February 2012 Daily Numbers in the group Housing Data
Wordpress theme by Abhishek Tripathi of Mediawick Digital Solutions
December 7th, 2009 at 7:17 am
@rp:
These people had no business buying a house in the first place.
Isn’t “free enterprise” great?
If these “homeowners” could meet CMHC’s (minimal) standards, any bank would be happy to refinance their mortgages. But since they can’t, the borrowers and lenders want the taxpayers to bail them out.
Well TFB.
December 6th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
@No Longer Looking: #54, I guess there’s more than one way to look at this. First, I don’t know if there’s a limit to the number of rich foreigners. Especially if you think that their economies might continue to grow and ours stagnate. If we were to just look at China as compared to 10 years ago, the number of wealthy have risen considerably. As their economy grows stronger, the number of wealthy will grow along with it. If you were to factor in forex, now is a bad time to convert to Canadian. So over time, as foreigners are making their local currency, and as the Loonie falls in value, Canadian products will feel as though they are on discount.
Keep in mind that China’s population is also 39 times that of Canada. In fact, pretty much every place in the world is more dense than Canada. If foreigners are willing to live more densely, they can pool together resources to purchase. We’ve been hearing about this type of behaviour since 2006, so it’s not out of the question.
December 6th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Is this the real story behind the rise in unemployment stats. McJobs and hopelessness. Deja Vu of the 1980′s
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....liday_jobs
Sure theres a lot of good food in London, but buying a pound with a CDN suck buck means having to pay double price for everything. It sucks to be CDN travelling in Europe if you can’t expense everything. I remember a time when CDN’s dominated the travel scene in Europe. Now, they’re a rare bird.
This why I’ve said that I suspect CDN internal policy is being affected by the type of travel CDN’s do now, which is strictly third world on the cheap or stay home.Two generations of CDNs have been shut out of Europe because of the low dollar policy.
These people are now bringing back the ideas that they picked up in the third world instead, devolving CDN society into a third world soup instead of to what was once a more enlightened and progtressive system. With the focus of CDN politics shifting more to the needs of the third world we are becoming a third world country ourselves.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
from the government To You With Love
December 6th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Non-traditional lenders won’t renew mortgages:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....le1390721/
December 6th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Saw this video about unemployment figures over at Mish’s. I’m sure it’s obvious to pretty much everyone here, but still bares repeating, and worth emailing the link to family and friends that don’t understand how unemployment statistics actually work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....player_emb
December 6th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
@93 I was the original owner and rented it out before the strata voted against rental about 5 years ago. However that decision did not immediately affect my rental unit until after the tenants moved out, i.e. last August; hence the sale as I have no intention to move in.
December 6th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
@Anonymous:
Are you sure you had a rental unit that was banned by the strata?
Which strata was that? do you have the strata number or building name? Which Property Management Company manages the building?
It would be grandfathered in, if what you said is true.
What building was it in?
December 6th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Don’t know about Chine
se food in Rome, but in London you can get great sushi at Zuma, Nobu, Japan Cafe, etc.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
89, very true.
We _are_ lucky here to have such a variety of good restaurants.
87 – Sushi in London is good, but is an expensive dinner out (but what isn’t in London?). I like the good quality reasonably priced sushi here.
But then again, this hardly makes Van unique.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
And, why go to Israel when a knish or a blintz or two can be had at a Haddassah Bazaar?
December 6th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
85 spectrum i couldn’t help laughing reading your post, its so vancouver. you sort of remind me of the vancouver guy i met on the ferry leaving Ios greece in 2000 who was whining that there was no good sushi on that island. I think anonymous 87 pointed out how you are wrong already. my question is why even travel if you have that attitude. Its like going to India and complaining about the quality of the mexican food.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
What are you guys seeing in Vancouver? There are sighting of … no not ALIENS .. just homeless down-and-out in exodus being driven out of the 2010 Olympic city. Spade of robberies in family run restaurants, B&Es, vehicles with smashed glasses are on the rise in Burnaby.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
@spectrum, suggest that you do a bit of traveling yourself.
There are no lack of excellent sushi bars in London. Did you not read that an ex-Russian-spy being poisoned in an upscale Japanese restaurant in London by KGB agent? There is one decent Chinese restaurant in Rome just just next to the Famous Trevi fountain. I recall 2 very good Chinese restaurants at Champs Elysees and no lack of Japanese restaurants too. Acquainted with Yoko Ono’s brother, heir of his family banking business, in Paris.
December 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
@other ted: Lets face it almost every country has every cuisine now. anyone that thinks we are unique here hasn’t travelled
Have you ever left BC? Tell me where you can get good sushi in London or Chinese food in Rome. It just isn’t there Vancouver is very lucky in that sense.
December 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
It’s starting… http://iphone.metronews.ca/Van.....cle/388024
December 6th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Not a Bush apologist but the loose lending at Fannie Mae goes back to the Clinton administration after Clinton apointed rahm emanualle to head fannie mae. Also Housing bubble was well on its way by the time bernake got in. Greenspan is not so innocent. I believe he was appointed by Reagan. And the deregulaton of the banking sector happened when clinton got rid of the Glass-Steagal act.
But like I said not an apologist for anyone there is a lot of blame to be spread around here.
December 6th, 2009 at 4:57 am
White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire
Read this article and try to tell us with a straight face that Bush did not promote, and then deny, the US housing bubble.
December 6th, 2009 at 4:17 am
@scooby:
Where do I start?
The Federal Reserve is in charge of interest rates, right? Who appointed Bernanke as Fed chair? Bush, right? Now read this:
Bernanke: There’s No Housing Bubble to Go Bust: October 27, 2005
I suggest you also try a little googling on, for example, “bush a home of your own”.
As for Congress, which party controlled both the House and Senate from 2002 to 2006, the period during which the bubble because obvious to any objective observer? The Republicans, that’s who. Not the party of Dodd and Frank.
And nobody told the banks to lend. No US law or regulation ever required banks to lend without a down payment, without verification of income, without reasonable debt service ratios, or with nutty amortization schedules. The banks – and more importantly the nonbank lenders such as Countrywide – decided to do this themselves.
Do a little research on the saying “the buck stops here”. The length to which some people will go to try to excuse Bush and the Republicans for things that they bear full responsibility for is unreal. Take your nonsense to a US blog where you’ll have more company. See you at the “tea party”.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:45 am
Experts outed for mass fraud.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ydo2Mwnwpac
December 6th, 2009 at 3:40 am
Most people don’t read blogs more than 4 lines long. Just say’in.
FORREST
December 6th, 2009 at 1:50 am
I had to sell a rental condo in late summer, last tenant left and strata no longer allow rental. Last week I met a realtor who sold and bought several units in that building for his clients. He told me that my ex-unit is for sale again asking initially at 60k more than the last sale price and now reduced to 40k more. There are still flippers out there.
December 6th, 2009 at 1:08 am
good laughs
http://economicrot.blogspot.com/
December 6th, 2009 at 1:02 am
Debt implosion in Dubai. Too big to fail. Ya sure. Great read. Great warning about what can happen when a government gets caught bullshitting.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t.....945283.ece
December 6th, 2009 at 12:34 am
A direct quote from the Copenhagen Agenda
“Finally, rich and poor will argue over the legal structure of an eventual deal, as poorer nations resist any effort to bind them legally, and subject them to close scrutiny, as they pursue greener economies. They cite the 1992 treaty, which distinguished between two worlds, recognizing an obligation by the rich to undo the climate damage they’ve done, and by the poor to raise their peoples from poverty. ”
Its all about the money people. The climate argument is just a smokescreen to get the gouging of the guilty to be ‘rich’ west to begin in earnest.
The recipients want no scrutiny of how the ‘carbon tax’ money will be distributed or used. The recipients want the same old staus quo of buying French Castles and NY apartments to go with the new mega yachts. After all who doesn’t need a high rise condo and a new yacht to fend off rising sea levels.
And they want the west to pay ‘reparations’ for having been successful while they have laid about raping each others goats and killing one another instead of developing fresh water and schools.
Why does this have anything to do with real estate? Because these assholish agendas of the government are going to further deteriorate your net pay by way of higher taxes to pay for this pie in the sky socialist bleeding heart nonsense. From a macro POV it will erode your ability to afford a home.
How many of you want an additional HST on top of all the taxes we already pay so some African dictator can steal the aid money and live in Zurich? The best way to promote change in the third world is to stop all aid and all immigration to and from those regions.
Let thier own people put pressure on thier own governments by force to enable change. Never mind countries like Canada acting like a pressure valve for the problems of Islam, Chinese christians, greedy and malcontent Tamils or tribal goat raping woman hating Somalis? Sending more money is obviously not solving thier internal issues is it? We need to pressure them to change by building walls around them and forcing them to clean up thier acts.
Why the hell should Canada take the blame for the Islamo tribal hatreds of the Ethiopias of the world? Our taxdollars should be spent here on improving the lives of Canadians.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
“I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”
Hello readers!
I am posting this in the 2-3 forums I frequent. Want to ask your opinion on something…
I like the idea of “Torches and Pitchforks” to express what we feel towards “the powers that be”. Glenn Beck had people mailing him real pitchforks at a time.
But we live in a digital world.
How about a little piece of free software courtesy of your truly for the cellphone, where you can chose to have a torch or a pitchfork. You write your message “House prices are unsustainable!!!” or “Walmart is dangerous!!!”.
Then you shake your pitchfork, shake it well!!!!
As you do that, a little map of the world, accessible from your phone or though a dedicated website from your machine, will show you shaking your pitchfork angrily, and a balloon with text will carry your message. The more you shake, the angrier your stick figure gets. At any given time, you can see what people all over the world are ranting about (the message stays after you finish shaking, of course).
It will take me a couple of months-nights to create something like this, but sounds like fun…
What do you think?
Best regards
arit
December 5th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
Interesting to see that most agree on the idea that the climate fluctuates, but few of the uber believers want to understand why. This group of ‘I believe anything the government tells me’ are not adding anything to the debate. Facts are widely available and they don’t all agree with the ‘sustainable development and carbon tax to feed the world’ crowd.
The climate has changed many times over the past millions of years. Suadi Arabi was once a vast wetlands. Central Asia is referred to as ‘Savannah Land, by scientists for having been a broad swath of verdant landscape which assisted in the migrations of the human species. Of course some of you are also going to deny Darwin by the looks of it.
Emissions are not the proven cause of climate change. If they were then climate change over the millenia would have had to be caused by emmissions and have clearly not been.
Heres a twist, maybe people are seeing a change because they have been made aware of the idea by the media. Maybe these same people are so narrow minded and arrogant that they think they can push back the effects of the natural universe on the enviornment in a time span of a human life instead of having to think in geologic time.
The neanderthals may have had this same discussion when watching climate change reduce the size and availabbility of large game animals across northern Europe leading to thier eventual extinction by starvation. The wooly mammoths probably didn’t like the grass freezing over either.
If the real problem is emissions and thats whats on the table as the most critical topic that needs to be solved immediatley, then why are India, China, Russia nad Brazil ( and all of the countries in the developing world) exempt from the carbon tax scheme proposed by the Kyotocrats?
Does Canada produce more greenhouse emissions than China? If its an emissions tax shouldn’t China be paying us? So clearly this is not an emissions tax to clean up the air or save the world.
So, if its not an emissions tax then what is it? Care to answer that truth deniers ( see it cuts both ways) because the evidence is clear that Kyoto is a carbox tax to fund sustainable development and not an emissions scheme to save the planet. If you don’t understand the propaganda then read the document itself. Have you?
Britian (under a previuos administration) outed the aid theft by African countries on the floor of the UN. It was met with rage of course. But the Brits point was valid. Of the hundreds of billions in aid dollars going to the third world, it all ends up back in the west in the shape of french castles and mega yachts in the mediteranean. The Brits brought out bank records and photographs.
So why does Gordon Brown and co want to start funding the aid scam again when they know that the money never reaches the people it was intended for? The word is ‘refugees’, they are flooding north and have massed along the coast of North Africa like a hoard of barbarians waiting for the tide to invade. Is the funding for climate change…no, its for stronger regimes to hold back the tide of escapees. Ugly yes, real yes again.
So you believe the claptrap that climate change can be ended by next Friday, ain’t gonna happen. I love the David Suzuki documentaries too and agree that his daughter is hot, but this alone will not blanket over the facts that earth has its own agenda and it has nothing to do with transferring wealth to the third world under various new tax schemes.
Climate has changed over millions and billions of years without the presence of man and will continue to do so. Wait for it…….entire continental shifts have also occured MANY times. What tax scheme will stop the formation of another Pangea or Gondowana.
Can’t handle the truth, and I’m the denier? Have another coffee.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Ha! Listening to the climate trolls (both sides) is almost as funny as listening to the gold bugs. Religion re-branded.
Let’s talk about how a gold bubble is even better than an RE bubble. Oddly enough the housing bears can’t always see a gold bubble…
Excuse the banter. I’m just killing time until Calgary RE drops to a reasonable level. Can’t find an interesting Calgary blog.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
becket I agree with your assessment. The tolerance argument is used as a straw man to silence anyone who questions our policy. Immigration is done simply to drive down wages and keep bubbles in real estate and stocks going as the baby boomers have bankrupted our societies.
No one in the government really cares about the immigrants or us.
I would say multiculturalism is no culture. What exactly is Canadian culture. Most will say we are like amercians then list how we are different. But on our own we don’t have one. And how does one apreciate another culture when we don’t have one to compare too.
I would add mulitculturalism isn’t about being able to eat out at different restaurants either. Lets face it almost every country has every cuisine now. anyone that thinks we are unique here hasn’t travelled.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
@ReadyToPop: “After the recent
“climategate” scandal, a recycle bin full of scepticism is entirely warranted.”
“Climategate” was the biggest load of nothing I’ve heard in over a year. Leave the science to the scientists. We’ll leave the tinfoil hat theories to you.
December 5th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
“Beckett @Straight.com
I have never understood the mass immigration policies implemented by western countries, such as: England, Canada, USA and Australia.
I know many of these countries were founded by immigrants, but I do not see the benefits of the scale of immigration we are seeing now.
There are 250,000 immigrants coming to Canada every year. We also have another 200,000 foreign employees coming to our country every year. This is similar in England and is receiving strong opposition form the British natives.
By sourcing foreign educated immigrants who are professionally employed in there chosen field already, and then asking them to come to Canada and work at McDonalds or as security guards or taxi drivers is a disservice to all parties involved. We are depriving the developing countries of their most educated people and devaluing their service in Canada.
Multiculturalism is not mass immigration. Multiculturalism is about enriching an already developed culture with a mix of other cultures to enhance and promote tolerance. It’s like putting salt on your eggs to enhance the taste. Mass immigration is like dumping salt on your food continuously until you can’t eat your food anymore. It benefits no one.”
December 5th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
“The funny thing of course is that the same people in power who created and then denied the RE bubble – Bush and company – were also the leading climate change deniers until they were shown the door by the voters.”
Where does one start?
The White House didn’t set interest rates, it didn’t oversee Fannie and Freddie and certainly didn’t tell the banks to lend and the rating agencies to go batty. Try Dodd and Frank over in the Congress if you want to find truly culpable politicians.
As for denying climate change, name one person who denies climate change? Climate is always changing. The point is that some people disagree that people are primarily responsible for this change.
And to this day, scientists have yet to find the human signal in AGW. All they have is an apparent correlation between increased CO2 and warming, and even this is suspect because the science now recognizes that the historical CO2 increases occur AFTER the warming, not before.
But to take this point of climate change denial a little further, if you want to really find a denier of climate change you could find it among those who deny that the Medieval Warm Period ever occurred. It is upon this denial that Jones, Briffa, Mann et al have built their argument that the warming between 1970 and 1998 was unprecedented.
All of this nonsense is crumbling now with the advent of ClimateGate. Jones has resigned, Mann is under investigation by his university and it turns out that Briffa’s tree ring study relied on just a dozen trees out of hundreds in the area.
Climateaudit.org is a helpful primer.
December 5th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
crazier than realpaul and his anti-police rants
December 5th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Yes no one denies the earth was in a warming period from teh 60′s to 1998. The earth has small cycles that are 30 -40 years of warming and cooling we were in a warmng period now it seems a cooling period. The debate is if we are in a cooling period now. That the warming in the last period was normal/not normal. and it is natural/man made.
No oned denied the earth warmed. There was some record melting of ice in the arctic not antarctic in 2007 i believe. 2008 record freezing.
Not being a global warming “denier” does not believe you are concerned about the envirnoment, or care about science. You can be and still be labelled a denier. Global warming theory is absolutist. You have to believe the following. The earth is warming, man is responsible, CO2 is the culprit, the warming is bad, it is unprecedented warming, if we don’t act now we are doomed. There can be no debate as this is scientific dogma.
If anyone saw the munk debates our green party leader and george monbiat(moonbat) both claimed global warming makes AIDS worse in africa.
If you believe in Global warming you cannot believe in the medieval warming period, mini ice age, the sun is responsible for the heating of the earth. and you must blame almost all world problems on it. you must believe polar bears are gonna go extinct even though stats show the opposite.
you can not believe in this theory and still be concerned about the environment and still want tough laws.
But I find it is being used as a straw man. “well even if we are wrong about CO2 its still good to cut back because its good for the environment”
Well I put this argument in the same league as “even if there is a housing bubble its good because it creates jobs” you see its about allocating resources and being able to assess the real problem. If finding an alternative to oil is being driven by psuedo science we might find a solution not as good as if we are being driven by science. Maybe diversifying for the sake of diversifying is a good idea, that way if peak cheap oil hits it won’t matter. But a lot of alternatives are not being explored for fear of CO2. Coal comes to mind. natural gas etc.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
@patriotz:
Woah, let’s back up here. Nobody is denying that the earth is warming – that much is indisputable. I don’t think you’ll ever see anyone argue about that – if you do, then feel free to call them a denier.
The debate revolves around whether the effect is man made or just part of natural variations. Since it turns out some key data was manipulated to produce such things as the “hockey stick” graph, then a healthy dose of skepticism is entirely appropriate. This is not denial, only re-opening of a debate which was declared closed only by one side with help of a massive dose of propoganda.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
thanks illogic for your words of wisdom.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
@patriotz: I think the definition of “burst” is at question here. From the chart that you linked to, in 2005, house prices were at $250K, and in 2009, ~$380K. It did go up to $480K somewhere in between those two timestamps, but is this how one would define a “bursting” of the bubble?
Catalysts are still necessary for ponzi schemes to burst. What triggers an abnormal number of people to pull out of their investments at the same time? A lack of buyers would not allow home prices to rise, but for what reason would there be an increase of homes going up for sale?
Unrelated to patriotz’s post, the California article linked by the main post is interesting, but is also out of context. The rise in home prices didn’t just start in 2002, but from at least 1996. In 1999/2000, there was the dotcom crash that reduced home prices – this affected some areas/classes more than others. Suffice to say that prices in metropolitan areas such as San Francisco was extremely steady. This recent bubble burst did not return prices to less than 1996 prices, not sure about 2002 prices.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
61 X other ted Says:
December 5th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Ice melts and it freezes again. In the summer it melts and in the winter it grows again. Its that simple.
—————-
If your world is this simple, I pity you. Or perhaps I envy you: after all, ignorance is indeed bliss.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Oh yeah and if polar bears are dying due to global warming, why are their popluations at all time high’s?
December 5th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Ice melts and it freezes again. In the summer it melts and in the winter it grows again. Its that simple. Not sure what you are looking for. If it is historical limits and averages you can look that up as easy as I can.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
@other ted:
Yeah OK, so can you just answer one question for us:
Why is all that ice melting?
Ice melts when the temperature rises, ice is melting all over the world, so what is your explanation for that if you think worldwide temperatures are not rising?
And spare the ad hominem arguments, stick to the physical facts, only.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
OMFG, I am agreeing with RP.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
just got an email from cknw stating canucks won 5-3 in carolina today. these fuckin morons cant even report a hockey score correctly, and millions of sheeple in vancouver listen to them and/or their affiliates for business, economic and investment advice. no wonder.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
I have a problem with the word denier. It is orwellian newspeak used to silence criticism. The oil lobby controlling the climate debate is a myth. One it actually helps them to have the general population believe in global warming as it limits the development of otherwise dirty oils such as the tar sands which puts further pressure on prices of conventional oil. also they have large trading floors that trade everything from oil, electricity, gas, currency, and yup you guessed it emissions. There is a far bigger lobby group than the oil companies it is the banks.
It is estimated that the emissions market is going to be worth 4 trillion to these banksters.
Look environmental degredation is real. Global warming is a cult masqerading by science to get this ridiculous market going.
If it is a real problem why don’t they do something about it like we did with acid rain, with hard caps on emitters. why does that work for some problems but not this stupid problem? Because it is a smoke screen.
There are far more reputable scientists, who are also environmentalist, on the other side of the debate. They are not deniers.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
a few internecine email flame wars does not negate what is happening in the Arctic and Greenland.
we are living in a fools paradise regarding both the climate and YVR RE…..
December 5th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
The climate change debate is moot because it’s quite clear we’re not going to do anything. It affects real estate in that I would be quite hesitant about buying a place near sea-level for the long term
In the 1970′s everyone was worried about SO2 emissions causing acid rain. Emissions were regulated domestically and international agreements were put in place, and now it’s basically solved (except in China, etc). In the 80′s everyone was worried about CFCs destroying the ozone layer. Then CFCs were regulated domestically and international agreements were put in place and ozone depletion has stopped. The ozone layer should be largely repaired in about 70 years.
The only thing different about CO2 is that oil companies are involved. Given that these guys are responsible for a multitude of wars and illegal arms deals, it was never going to be a fair fight. They waged a public relations war decisively, and until the problem manifests itself in a massive unstoppable crisis, I don’t expect anyone’s mind to change.
Glaciers are melting at an inconceivable rate – you can just look at the satellite images year after year – and yet the media is filled with people inveighing on crooked scientists and making bizarre claims that the earth is actually cooling when it’s clearly not.
I’m not going to defend what those scientists did. Their lack of integrity is highly damaging. But there are enough people working on this to have confidence in the overall conclusions, and also to expect a few bad apples.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
@Anonymous: From I’ve heard, these new Chinese tourist won’t be wealthy and they probably can’t get funky financing to buy in a foreign country. Think about it, truly wealthy Chinese already were finding ways around such restrictions.
Its funny how the real estate industry always hypes everything.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
@Patriotzed
Who is really in denial here? After the recent
“climategate” scandal, a recycle bin full of
scepticism is entirely warranted. Who lives
in the bloated mansion …Bush or Gore?
December 5th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
It’s quite sneaky to label someone a “climate change denier” as it implies climate change is a proven fact, when it’s just been revealed that the “facts” at the core of the issue have been manipulated for years. It’s also a way to make someone sound loony in the same way you’d call someone a holocaust denier.
I think I’ll call you a climate change denier denier, how’s that?
December 5th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Housing Bubble Blog stateside has been getting them for years.
The funny thing of course is that the same people in power who created and then denied the RE bubble – Bush and company – were also the leading climate change deniers until they were shown the door by the voters.
But RE bubble denial is far more pervasive and persistent then climate change denial, although both phenomena are equally obvious. The reason IMHO is that you tend to deny something if it negatively affects your own financial situation. Very few of us are oil company executives or have ties to them, but most of us own a house.