[quote=SD Realtor]CAR once again it is your entire point of view comes from your own perception. You fail to consider any other point of view. As I said many a poster on this site owns rental property or multiple rentals.
You make is sound as if passive income from rentals is some crime against humanity. You therefore slot any other people who earn income from rentals as doing something that is in your own words, “not the right thing to do”.
I had my first rental when I was making less then 40k. I know many many families who are doing much better with rentals and make middle class money and are quite happy as opposed to putting that money at risk in the stock market.
Let’s make darn well sure that over the past four years the current administration has bailed out Wall Street, and furthermore been at the helm of all these institutional deals that you want to whine about. The current administration has also been 100% on board with all of the measures that keep people who are slaves to underwater properties in that position. Let’s not forget that with all of the inventory there would be plenty of properties available for everyone, investors and owner occupants alike. Furthermore if policies were enacted that wouldn’t give ANY IDIOT a loan then that would serve to provide a stronger foundation for homeowners. Mandatory large downpayments would go a long way as well. Contrary to your point of view home ownership is NOT A RIGHT. Most of the problem is an entitlement attitude that we “had” to get people in homes. It was shared by republicans and democrats and was plain wrong.
Once again, Romney said nothing about these sorts of institutional deals and programs that were given birth UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION. In fact letting the foreclosures happen TAKES MONEY AWAY FROM the super rich. However rather then addressing that issue of the fact about letting foreclosures happen, you jumpt to a conclusion about what happens to the inventory based on programs that exist today under the current administration. You have nothing with regards to facts what Romney would do. You have speculation.
I on the other hand have seen four years of TRILLIONS of taxpayer money move from the public to the very very rich… It is amazingly hypocritical but it is nothing that I don’t expect.
You take a very fair and level statement and jump to a conclusion that is speculative. Whereas you conveniently don’t comment on what has gone on.
Talk about favoring the rich…
Honestly it is not even worth debating. I am out.[/quote]
SDR, you know full well that I have been 100% opposed to all of the bailouts, even before they ever began. I have commented, **repeatedly** on this very blog about my opposition to any and all bailouts that focus on irresponsible borrowers and/or lenders. If you doubt this, find a SINGLE post where I supported any bailouts of these idiots. I took two weeks out of my life (full time++, about 14 hours/day) calling, faxing, e-mailing, and writing legislators, regulators, the media — anyone who would listen or who could be the voice of reason — in opposition to the bailouts, and this was in 2008…before the current administration, which I do not support, either. The bailout efforts and the system which favors large-scale investors over “Investor” Sixpack were put into place well before Obama ever came into office. Of course, he (the puppet on the left hand of our masters) was chosen because they knew he’d be friendly to the financial parasites.
As for the “rights” of people to own their own homes vs. the “rights” of investors to profit from flips or rentals, I look at it from the perspective of what would benefit society most.
Let’s shrink it down: Do you think your family would be better off owning your own home — one that is affordable enough that it could be paid off by the time you are retired or too sick to work (or sooner), giving you equity and/or a low-cost place to live; OR do you think you’d be better off paying rent (usually rising over time) to a landlord for the rest of your life, even after retirement or when you’re too sick to work? Do you think the neighborhood and neighbors would be better off if their neighbors owned their own (affordable!) homes, or do you think they’d benefit more by having a slew of rentals in their neighborhood?
The “rights” of investors/speculators to make a profit from buying up existing assets vs. the “rights” of families to own their own primary residence…it’s subjective, but I am 100% of the belief that society is best served when “investors” work on expanding and improving productive capacity instead of exaggerating price movements during times of scarce or abundant supply — which is what they do when they focus on existing assets, especially those that are basic necessities, like housing.
Also, realize that the housing/credit bubble could never have gotten as big as it did if not for all of the speculation. At the peak, over 40% of the purchases were made by people who already owned a home, and I’m willing to bet that a very large percentage of the other ~60% were buying because they thought that “real estate always goes up,” and hoped to sell to the next greatest fool. Theoretically, if the only people who could buy a home were the people who intended to live in them as primary residences, prices would be far, far lower, and people would not be so deep in debt, both because they would never have leveraged as much, and because they wouldn’t have used so much consumer debt with the assumption that their houses would pay the bills for them.
Again, I have always said that I am a beneficiary of these bubbles — both on the way up, and on the way down — because that is the game we are forced to play. My family made most of their money from real estate (both parents had their broker’s licenses and were heavily invested in real estate). Though I would prefer to make my money in more productive ways, “real work” doesn’t provide nearly the kind of opportunities that “investing” does, so we play the hand that we are dealt.
Look at your own situation, for instance. You have an engineering degree, and presumably could be involved in creating and improving the way goods are designed or manufactured (not sure which type of degree you have, but you get the picture). Why is it that you are spending so much time on RE “investments” when you could be spending that time doing productive work? Is it because our system is set up to benefit speculators over producers/investors? Do you not see how that causes a gross misallocation of (human) resources? I’ve known many people like yourself (and myself) who have forgone productive work in order to pursue speculative opportunities that do not benefit society in any way. Do you not see a problem with that?
