Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

 

2009-10-06 14:00:22
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6829|Texas - Bigger than France

cpt.fass1 wrote:

The housing flipping is no longer... Smart banks, you have to hold onto a property for at least 3 months, no short sale flips anymore :-(.. Whoo is me.

Realistically though, The idea of buying a house living in it paying off the mortgage is all fine and good intill the Government wants there money, you have to pay taxes on all that positive income, remember that.. If it's not the property that you own and you have to sell it for what ever reason, anything over 40k(different from state to state) is capital gains.. While renting is a great idea it also slumps when there aren't JOBS out there, so it's still a real risky business that were most your properties can end up costing you..

Education cost money as well so the find a way to market yourself is really bullshit. Right now a good portion of the students I know are going for nursing or education, which is going to make those industries the next bubble to burst..

I really hope your dream does work out for you, just remember to at least LLC yourself with your investment properties.
Some clarifications...

A rental house converts it from a personal residence (where the exemption applies to selling) to an investment which means capital gains always applies...unless you depreciate the house...then the depreciation fully recoverable.

On the LLC, if you have multiple properties, make sure you have multiple LLCs.  You don't want someone sueing you and taking the other four properties in the settlement because you failed to do maintenance on the first home.

And Johnny - I think your sarcasm detector is broke.  Fass doesn't strike me as one of the lazys
2009-10-06 14:07:26
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6983|NJ
P.S. 170k isn't as much as it use to be.
2009-10-06 14:11:49
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6829|Texas - Bigger than France

JohnG@lt wrote:

I understand exactly what you are saying. But how many of them got complacent and overextended themselves to the point that they were depending on the rent in order to make mortgage payments etc? I wasn't suggesting to live frugally for only 5 years and then go nuts. It's a lifetime lifestyle thing. I want to live comfortably yes, and I will, but I don't have any desire to fake being wealthier than I am. I don't need or want a $100k yacht even though I'll be able to afford it etc. Everything I will earn is meant to be passed down to my future children, and I'm going to teach them to do the same exact thing for their kids. It's how 'old money' in this country has done it for centuries
Overextended no.  Most of my clients have a net worth over $5m.

It was a hobby before the economy turned, and was a bad investment after it turned.

There's easier ways to make money then owning property and renting it...that's all I'm saying.

For instance...I have a friend named John who wants to start a company renting houses.  I finance it, and I'm the silent partner...with a right to 25% above my investment, first right of payback (if the deal goes south).  My partner then does all the work and I share in 25%, until the partnership dissolves.  If the deal goes south?  I force the house to sale and recoup my investment.
2009-10-06 14:16:40
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7062|Noizyland

lowing wrote:

Nope, the US defended and protected and aided Europe until you were strong enough to:

1. defend yourselves

2. trash the US for not minding its own business.
Once again with the "you", I'm not European.

You're talking about the Marshall Plan I imagine. I'd steer away from that if I were you, that was an much an aid package as it was economic imperialism. Once again it's an example of Americans thinking they had this great positive impact on the world so somehow the rest of the world has no right to criticise it's policies. This is not the case.

Also, if it is ever revealed that Bush was right about anything regarding the Middle East I'll buy you a coke.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-10-06 14:28:03
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Pug wrote:

Overextended no.  Most of my clients have a net worth over $5m.

It was a hobby before the economy turned, and was a bad investment after it turned.

There's easier ways to make money then owning property and renting it...that's all I'm saying.

For instance...I have a friend named John who wants to start a company renting houses.  I finance it, and I'm the silent partner...with a right to 25% above my investment, first right of payback (if the deal goes south).  My partner then does all the work and I share in 25%, until the partnership dissolves.  If the deal goes south?  I force the house to sale and recoup my investment.
I know what you are saying, it's just easier to withstand a hit if you have property to fall back on. The rent itself is rather paltry, even with 4 properties paying you $2000 a month it is only $96k a year minus taxes. $96k a year on a $2M investment is rather piss poor and I understand that (hell, it's a little less than 5% and slightly above the normal inflation rate). But as a wealth base it's unbeatable imo. My lifes ambition is not to be a landlord, it is to use those properties as a springboard and as collateral for further investment. It's just a lot better than having a heart attack every time the stock market has a hiccup, you know? In my eyes caution and wise investment trumps fast money and high risk any day of the week.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-10-06 14:33:05)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-10-06 14:45:42
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England
Pug, all that being said I would willingly listen to any advice you are willing to give.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-10-06 14:51:01
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6983|NJ
Take all your money and bury it by a big tree.. Draw a map and pass that down from generation to generation.. Wait about 5 generations have them dig it up. That antique money should be worth a ton, also bury a gun with bullets..
2009-10-06 14:52:37
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6983|NJ

JohnG@lt wrote:

Pug wrote:

Overextended no.  Most of my clients have a net worth over $5m.

It was a hobby before the economy turned, and was a bad investment after it turned.

There's easier ways to make money then owning property and renting it...that's all I'm saying.

For instance...I have a friend named John who wants to start a company renting houses.  I finance it, and I'm the silent partner...with a right to 25% above my investment, first right of payback (if the deal goes south).  My partner then does all the work and I share in 25%, until the partnership dissolves.  If the deal goes south?  I force the house to sale and recoup my investment.
I know what you are saying, it's just easier to withstand a hit if you have property to fall back on. The rent itself is rather paltry, even with 4 properties paying you $2000 a month it is only $96k a year minus taxes. $96k a year on a $2M investment is rather piss poor and I understand that (hell, it's a little less than 5% and slightly above the normal inflation rate). But as a wealth base it's unbeatable imo. My lifes ambition is not to be a landlord, it is to use those properties as a springboard and as collateral for further investment. It's just a lot better than having a heart attack every time the stock market has a hiccup, you know? In my eyes caution and wise investment trumps fast money and high risk any day of the week.
Follow the trend of politicians find out what lobbiest are in there pocket then invest in who ever you think will be next in the white house.
2009-10-06 14:58:18
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6829|Texas - Bigger than France

JohnG@lt wrote:

Pug, all that being said I would willingly listen to any advice you are willing to give.
Oh sorry.  I'm pissy today - deadline coming...spending too much time procrastinating.

The property game used to be less risky.  Renting property is a lot of work.  But its a good way to springboard to something else.  Get out of it asap...trust me.

Example...in Texas.  To kick a renter out: you have to have three months of non-payment and three months of notices before you can legally evict them.  So that's six months...

Figure out what you like to do, make sure there's a market for it...and start your own business.  I started my own...I work a lot but I like what I do...plus I have a flexible schedule.  And no...I'm not a drug dealer.

Renting is solid if all goes well...but it's a lot of time and a longer payback.  Starting a business = large investment but faster payback.

If you are serious about the property game...pm me questions about the maths/business plan stuff.  If I got time I'll answer or at least point you to an asnwerI think Kmarion and Fass are involved in property
2009-10-06 16:54:45
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6938|USA

Ty wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nope, the US defended and protected and aided Europe until you were strong enough to:

1. defend yourselves

2. trash the US for not minding its own business.
Once again with the "you", I'm not European.

You're talking about the Marshall Plan I imagine. I'd steer away from that if I were you, that was an much an aid package as it was economic imperialism. Once again it's an example of Americans thinking they had this great positive impact on the world so somehow the rest of the world has no right to criticise it's policies. This is not the case.

Also, if it is ever revealed that Bush was right about anything regarding the Middle East I'll buy you a coke.
I didn't say Europe owed us something. I maintain we secured their freedom to bitch about the US. No one else would have been so liberating.

Imperialism? You do realize we left the continent to its govts. right? and whatever bases we established with the permission of those govts. helped build a thriving loca leconomy all around them. You do know this right?
2009-10-07 12:31:20
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6983|NJ
Also could it be that all the rich are leaving california cause it sucks, sorry ATG?

At least one giant Wild Fire a year, it's getting over run by Illegals, and from what I can understand is virtually impossible to afford?
2009-10-07 17:51:13
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7062|Noizyland

lowing wrote:

I didn't say Europe owed us something. I maintain we secured their freedom to bitch about the US. No one else would have been so liberating.

Imperialism? You do realize we left the continent to its govts. right? and whatever bases we established with the permission of those govts. helped build a thriving loca leconomy all around them. You do know this right?
Europeans were and still are free to bitch about whatever country they want. I'm not sure what you're alluding to here though so I'll leave this one.

As to your point on my accusation of economic Imperialism, (note: economic Imperialism,) there are two ways to look at the issue. One way is the "The United States did the world a huge favour, look how generous they are," the other is "The United States stood to get as much out of their "generosity" as post-war Europe did." It's not a matter if being ingrateful it's a mater of common sense - no-one get's a free lunch. Just look at the Suez Crisis to see how much the US had France and Britain's balls in a vice.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-10-07 18:35:25
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6938|USA

Ty wrote:

lowing wrote:

I didn't say Europe owed us something. I maintain we secured their freedom to bitch about the US. No one else would have been so liberating.

Imperialism? You do realize we left the continent to its govts. right? and whatever bases we established with the permission of those govts. helped build a thriving loca leconomy all around them. You do know this right?
Europeans were and still are free to bitch about whatever country they want. I'm not sure what you're alluding to here though so I'll leave this one.

As to your point on my accusation of economic Imperialism, (note: economic Imperialism,) there are two ways to look at the issue. One way is the "The United States did the world a huge favour, look how generous they are," the other is "The United States stood to get as much out of their "generosity" as post-war Europe did." It's not a matter if being ingrateful it's a mater of common sense - no-one get's a free lunch. Just look at the Suez Crisis to see how much the US had France and Britain's balls in a vice.
Uhhhh no, there was a time where Europe was NOT free to bitch. Sorry.

I am sorry that the US did not collapse in its aid to assist Europe, as apparently you think we should have, in order to make our generosity genuine and sincere. You and Cam must be talking.
2009-10-07 18:49:14
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7062|Noizyland

lowing wrote:

Uhhhh no, there was a time where Europe was NOT free to bitch. Sorry.

I am sorry that the US did not collapse in its aid to assist Europe, as apparently you think we should have, in order to make our generosity genuine and sincere. You and Cam must be talking.
Again, I'm not sure what you were alluding to with the whole "free to bitch" thing, you might have to clarify that for me.

Don't be so naive about your own country's motives lowing. There is always another way to look at things and "gawrsh the US is just so damn generous" has less logic behind it than "the US stood to gain a lot from the economic support given to post war Europe." Again, it's not a lack of gratitude or a percieved lack of sincerity, it's logic.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-10-07 18:53:10
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6938|USA

Ty wrote:

lowing wrote:

Uhhhh no, there was a time where Europe was NOT free to bitch. Sorry.

I am sorry that the US did not collapse in its aid to assist Europe, as apparently you think we should have, in order to make our generosity genuine and sincere. You and Cam must be talking.
Again, I'm not sure what you were alluding to with the whole "free to bitch" thing, you might have to clarify that for me.

Don't be so naive about your own country's motives lowing. There is always another way to look at things and "gawrsh the US is just so damn generous" has less logic behind it than "the US stood to gain a lot from the economic support given to post war Europe." Again, it's not a lack of gratitude or a percieved lack of sincerity, it's logic.
Yeah the US wanted a free Europe to conduct trade and ally with. Sorry for being so self interested.
2009-10-07 19:19:57
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7062|Noizyland

It runs deeper than that lowing. Like I said earlier, check out the Suez Crisis. America had, (and still has to a certain degree,) significant control over what happens in Europe in ways that do satisfy the criteria for Imperialism.

Although it's good to see you acknowledge the fact that American aid wasn't just twinkle-eyed generosity like many seem to think. There is always a reason that stems from self-interest. That doesn't necessarily condemn anything, it's just a fact.

(I don't even know what this thread was originally about...)
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-10-09 21:59:12
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6835|San Diego, CA, USA
The Water Authority in California (agency responsible for 68% of all water in California), is about to vote themselves a 25% increase in their pensions.

This after increasing water rates 20% earlier this year and another 11% early next year.

Also there are ~5,600 people who are drawing a pension, but still working either at the same job or a similar job.  (Some of the pensions are over $100,000/year.

This year pensions will cost Californians $3.4 billion/year, up from $187 million in 1999.

Some union workers can get up to 95% of their top salary for their pension.
2009-10-10 12:27:53
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6938|USA

Ty wrote:

It runs deeper than that lowing. Like I said earlier, check out the Suez Crisis. America had, (and still has to a certain degree,) significant control over what happens in Europe in ways that do satisfy the criteria for Imperialism.

Although it's good to see you acknowledge the fact that American aid wasn't just twinkle-eyed generosity like many seem to think. There is always a reason that stems from self-interest. That doesn't necessarily condemn anything, it's just a fact.

(I don't even know what this thread was originally about...)
The purpose of any govt. ( or should be) is to look after the best interests of the citizens of that country. What I don't understand is, why are you making this point as if the US alone, works to secure its own self interests, while the rest of the world acts as if we are all one big blue marble, with no orders.

 

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard