North park flips… relatistic prices?

[sdrealtor]

Good night, you’ve been a great audience………….

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Your country is run by a small wealthy elite group of individuals and I bet not one of them is a flipper.[/quote]

The vast majority of truly wealthy people I’ve known do own a lot of real estate — much more than they would ever “need.” Additionally, many (most?) wealthy people got a significant portion of their wealth from real estate. It’s a rich man’s game.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make…

In my world, all the incentives to invest in real estate would be stripped away. No MID for second homes or investments, no deductions for repairs (which is much abused!), no tax credits, no govt-backed mortgage market, etc. There could be some exceptions on the deductions if it was for a rental unit(s), and a portion of the profits would have to go back to the tenant or there would be some kind of rent control so the landlord could not profit so much from rental income (it would effectively be capped). This is how much I believe in home ownership.

This is all theoretical at this point, and what I think really doesn’t matter. I’m not expecting anyone else to agree with my beliefs. It would just be nice to see more families living in their own homes, and fewer investors/speculators whose sole purpose in the market is to take money away from future buyers or renters.

BTW, it’s not a matter of owning in a “prime” area, so not sure where that came from. People keep thinking this is a personal thing, and it’s not. We can very easily afford to live anywhere in our target areas. What I REFUSE to do is overpay because the market is being so manipulated and I see too much downside with all this speculation. What I’m talking about applies to ALL real estate, regardless of where it is or the desirability.

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Your country is run by a small wealthy elite group of individuals and I bet not one of them is a flipper.[/quote]

The vast majority of truly wealthy people I’ve known do own a lot of real estate — much more than they would ever “need.” Additionally, many (most?) wealthy people got a significant portion of their wealth from real estate. It’s a rich man’s game.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make…

In my world, all the incentives to invest in real estate would be stripped away. No MID for second homes or investments, no deductions for repairs (which is much abused!), no tax credits, no govt-backed mortgage market, etc. There could be some exceptions on the deductions if it was for a rental unit(s), and a portion of the profits would have to go back to the tenant or there would be some kind of rent control so the landlord could not profit so much from rental income (it would effectively be capped). This is how much I believe in home ownership.

This is all theoretical at this point, and what I think really doesn’t matter. I’m not expecting anyone else to agree with my beliefs. It would just be nice to see more families living in their own homes, and fewer investors/speculators whose sole purpose in the market is to take money away from future buyers or renters.

BTW, it’s not a matter of owning in a “prime” area, so not sure where that came from. People keep thinking this is a personal thing, and it’s not. We can very easily afford to live anywhere in our target areas. What I REFUSE to do is overpay because the market is being so manipulated and I see too much downside with all this speculation. What I’m talking about applies to ALL real estate, regardless of where it is or the desirability.

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Your country is run by a small wealthy elite group of individuals and I bet not one of them is a flipper.[/quote]

The vast majority of truly wealthy people I’ve known do own a lot of real estate — much more than they would ever “need.” Additionally, many (most?) wealthy people got a significant portion of their wealth from real estate. It’s a rich man’s game.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make…

In my world, all the incentives to invest in real estate would be stripped away. No MID for second homes or investments, no deductions for repairs (which is much abused!), no tax credits, no govt-backed mortgage market, etc. There could be some exceptions on the deductions if it was for a rental unit(s), and a portion of the profits would have to go back to the tenant or there would be some kind of rent control so the landlord could not profit so much from rental income (it would effectively be capped). This is how much I believe in home ownership.

This is all theoretical at this point, and what I think really doesn’t matter. I’m not expecting anyone else to agree with my beliefs. It would just be nice to see more families living in their own homes, and fewer investors/speculators whose sole purpose in the market is to take money away from future buyers or renters.

BTW, it’s not a matter of owning in a “prime” area, so not sure where that came from. People keep thinking this is a personal thing, and it’s not. We can very easily afford to live anywhere in our target areas. What I REFUSE to do is overpay because the market is being so manipulated and I see too much downside with all this speculation. What I’m talking about applies to ALL real estate, regardless of where it is or the desirability.

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Your country is run by a small wealthy elite group of individuals and I bet not one of them is a flipper.[/quote]

The vast majority of truly wealthy people I’ve known do own a lot of real estate — much more than they would ever “need.” Additionally, many (most?) wealthy people got a significant portion of their wealth from real estate. It’s a rich man’s game.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make…

In my world, all the incentives to invest in real estate would be stripped away. No MID for second homes or investments, no deductions for repairs (which is much abused!), no tax credits, no govt-backed mortgage market, etc. There could be some exceptions on the deductions if it was for a rental unit(s), and a portion of the profits would have to go back to the tenant or there would be some kind of rent control so the landlord could not profit so much from rental income (it would effectively be capped). This is how much I believe in home ownership.

This is all theoretical at this point, and what I think really doesn’t matter. I’m not expecting anyone else to agree with my beliefs. It would just be nice to see more families living in their own homes, and fewer investors/speculators whose sole purpose in the market is to take money away from future buyers or renters.

BTW, it’s not a matter of owning in a “prime” area, so not sure where that came from. People keep thinking this is a personal thing, and it’s not. We can very easily afford to live anywhere in our target areas. What I REFUSE to do is overpay because the market is being so manipulated and I see too much downside with all this speculation. What I’m talking about applies to ALL real estate, regardless of where it is or the desirability.

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Your country is run by a small wealthy elite group of individuals and I bet not one of them is a flipper.[/quote]

The vast majority of truly wealthy people I’ve known do own a lot of real estate — much more than they would ever “need.” Additionally, many (most?) wealthy people got a significant portion of their wealth from real estate. It’s a rich man’s game.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make…

In my world, all the incentives to invest in real estate would be stripped away. No MID for second homes or investments, no deductions for repairs (which is much abused!), no tax credits, no govt-backed mortgage market, etc. There could be some exceptions on the deductions if it was for a rental unit(s), and a portion of the profits would have to go back to the tenant or there would be some kind of rent control so the landlord could not profit so much from rental income (it would effectively be capped). This is how much I believe in home ownership.

This is all theoretical at this point, and what I think really doesn’t matter. I’m not expecting anyone else to agree with my beliefs. It would just be nice to see more families living in their own homes, and fewer investors/speculators whose sole purpose in the market is to take money away from future buyers or renters.

BTW, it’s not a matter of owning in a “prime” area, so not sure where that came from. People keep thinking this is a personal thing, and it’s not. We can very easily afford to live anywhere in our target areas. What I REFUSE to do is overpay because the market is being so manipulated and I see too much downside with all this speculation. What I’m talking about applies to ALL real estate, regardless of where it is or the desirability.

[pemeliza]

CAR, I hope you don’t think I was trying to make it personal with my post because I certainly wasn’t trying to do that.

I believe that the vast majority of real estate in this country is currently affordable to average families so your ideal largely holds true.

[pemeliza]

CAR, I hope you don’t think I was trying to make it personal with my post because I certainly wasn’t trying to do that.

I believe that the vast majority of real estate in this country is currently affordable to average families so your ideal largely holds true.

[pemeliza]

CAR, I hope you don’t think I was trying to make it personal with my post because I certainly wasn’t trying to do that.

I believe that the vast majority of real estate in this country is currently affordable to average families so your ideal largely holds true.

[pemeliza]

CAR, I hope you don’t think I was trying to make it personal with my post because I certainly wasn’t trying to do that.

I believe that the vast majority of real estate in this country is currently affordable to average families so your ideal largely holds true.

[pemeliza]

CAR, I hope you don’t think I was trying to make it personal with my post because I certainly wasn’t trying to do that.

I believe that the vast majority of real estate in this country is currently affordable to average families so your ideal largely holds true.

[CA renter]

Thanks, pemeliza. I didn’t think you were trying to make it personal at all. Thanks for your post, though. 🙂

Believe it or not, there are still a lot of places across the nation that are still not affordable to the people who are living and working there. The bubble was allowed to burst in many places, but not all. From what I’m hearing, they saw the same pattern everywhere else that we’ve seen here: the lowest-tier homes declined because there was no buffer, whatsoever. The mid-higher tier areas have held up better because the govt began their various props just as the declines were hitting these better areas. It’s not just the “prime” areas in NCC that are being propped up, it’s everywhere (unless the area was hit by something else, like the decimation of their job base like Detroit, etc.).

[CA renter]

Thanks, pemeliza. I didn’t think you were trying to make it personal at all. Thanks for your post, though. 🙂

Believe it or not, there are still a lot of places across the nation that are still not affordable to the people who are living and working there. The bubble was allowed to burst in many places, but not all. From what I’m hearing, they saw the same pattern everywhere else that we’ve seen here: the lowest-tier homes declined because there was no buffer, whatsoever. The mid-higher tier areas have held up better because the govt began their various props just as the declines were hitting these better areas. It’s not just the “prime” areas in NCC that are being propped up, it’s everywhere (unless the area was hit by something else, like the decimation of their job base like Detroit, etc.).

[CA renter]

Thanks, pemeliza. I didn’t think you were trying to make it personal at all. Thanks for your post, though. 🙂

Believe it or not, there are still a lot of places across the nation that are still not affordable to the people who are living and working there. The bubble was allowed to burst in many places, but not all. From what I’m hearing, they saw the same pattern everywhere else that we’ve seen here: the lowest-tier homes declined because there was no buffer, whatsoever. The mid-higher tier areas have held up better because the govt began their various props just as the declines were hitting these better areas. It’s not just the “prime” areas in NCC that are being propped up, it’s everywhere (unless the area was hit by something else, like the decimation of their job base like Detroit, etc.).

[CA renter]

Thanks, pemeliza. I didn’t think you were trying to make it personal at all. Thanks for your post, though. 🙂

Believe it or not, there are still a lot of places across the nation that are still not affordable to the people who are living and working there. The bubble was allowed to burst in many places, but not all. From what I’m hearing, they saw the same pattern everywhere else that we’ve seen here: the lowest-tier homes declined because there was no buffer, whatsoever. The mid-higher tier areas have held up better because the govt began their various props just as the declines were hitting these better areas. It’s not just the “prime” areas in NCC that are being propped up, it’s everywhere (unless the area was hit by something else, like the decimation of their job base like Detroit, etc.).

[Author]

Posts