[NotCranky]

I’t doesn’t work that way so why should I look for principles. I am collecting personal assets through leverage of things I bought with income and assets which i sold and paid taxes for if applicable. When I need to pay I will pay. If I sell something I build I will pay.If I collect rents I will pay.Meanwhile since the mortgage is against and owner occuppied home, when I get it, it is tax deductible. I will use it when my wifes income and mine, outside of these projests requires it.Since we reproduced like rodents that isn’t likely. My tax guy asks me what I did and I tell him.
If I use that money to buy an RV do I pay taxes on it,hell no. So where is the “principles” problem with me putting it to good use? besides I hate working 9 to %. Many people here know and perhaps believe I quit selling RE in 2004. So I work to make a living until my principles allows me to sell RE, which is coming real soon. I got principle on top of my principle Patient.

Now please come back and say wow that’s cool Rus or tell me what I am doing wrong . Don’t jsut slink off because I feel dumped on when people do that. Finish what you started. I will take a lesson if you can teach me one.

[NotCranky]

I used stated incime because I don’t pay myself I am gorwing my RE holdings instead through sweat equity. I don’t take commission when I buy property. Because I would pay inocome and property taxes on it. I am not after money I am after solvency through rents. First step build my own hosue cash w/o pay. Second step use stated income loan to buy properties I see That I can work for free on for 1 year eating 20k of loan proceeds to live on. The things i bring the table in splitting lots,drawing my own plans , operating heavy equipment, and performing more thatn half of the construction and all the management of a house are worth at least 200k a year. I don’t feel bad stating my income at 50%LTV against my assets and nobody else cares.

What lenders do care about now and why the caller couldn’t get a stated income loan is because reserve requirements are now three times stated income and the probably didn’t have it. If I have to pay income tax on my rentals or capital gains on sales as I go I haven’t cheated anybody on taxes.

Before If I am correct state income require a bank acct that showed a little cash flow. I got a 100% LTV state cash out and helor a few years ago so I could live in my hyperinflated house to pay for a splittable lot and start building my new house and sold that at the peak.

Ps: I edited this thing once I hit a key wrong or something and it got lost. I think it makes sense…gotta go.

[NotCranky]

I used stated incime because I don’t pay myself I am gorwing my RE holdings instead through sweat equity. I don’t take commission when I buy property. Because I would pay inocome and property taxes on it. I am not after money I am after solvency through rents. First step build my own hosue cash w/o pay. Second step use stated income loan to buy properties I see That I can work for free on for 1 year eating 20k of loan proceeds to live on. The things i bring the table in splitting lots,drawing my own plans , operating heavy equipment, and performing more thatn half of the construction and all the management of a house are worth at least 200k a year. I don’t feel bad stating my income at 50%LTV against my assets and nobody else cares.

What lenders do care about now and why the caller couldn’t get a stated income loan is because reserve requirements are now three times stated income and the probably didn’t have it. If I have to pay income tax on my rentals or capital gains on sales as I go I haven’t cheated anybody on taxes.

Before If I am correct state income require a bank acct that showed a little cash flow. I got a 100% LTV state cash out and helor a few years ago so I could live in my hyperinflated house to pay for a splittable lot and start building my new house and sold that at the peak.

Ps: I edited this thing once I hit a key wrong or something and it got lost. I think it makes sense…gotta go.

[NotCranky]

I used stated incime because I don’t pay myself I am gorwing my RE holdings instead through sweat equity. I don’t take commission when I buy property. Because I would pay inocome and property taxes on it. I am not after money I am after solvency through rents. First step build my own hosue cash w/o pay. Second step use stated income loan to buy properties I see That I can work for free on for 1 year eating 20k of loan proceeds to live on. The things i bring the table in splitting lots,drawing my own plans , operating heavy equipment, and performing more thatn half of the construction and all the management of a house are worth at least 200k a year. I don’t feel bad stating my income at 50%LTV against my assets and nobody else cares.

What lenders do care about now and why the caller couldn’t get a stated income loan is because reserve requirements are now three times stated income and the probably didn’t have it. If I have to pay income tax on my rentals or capital gains on sales as I go I haven’t cheated anybody on taxes.

Before If I am correct state income require a bank acct that showed a little cash flow. I got a 100% LTV state cash out and helor a few years ago so I could live in my hyperinflated house to pay for a splittable lot and start building my new house and sold that at the peak.

Ps: I edited this thing once I hit a key wrong or something and it got lost. I think it makes sense…gotta go.

[NotCranky]

I used stated incime because I don’t pay myself I am gorwing my RE holdings instead through sweat equity. I don’t take commission when I buy property. Because I would pay inocome and property taxes on it. I am not after money I am after solvency through rents. First step build my own hosue cash w/o pay. Second step use stated income loan to buy properties I see That I can work for free on for 1 year eating 20k of loan proceeds to live on. The things i bring the table in splitting lots,drawing my own plans , operating heavy equipment, and performing more thatn half of the construction and all the management of a house are worth at least 200k a year. I don’t feel bad stating my income at 50%LTV against my assets and nobody else cares.

What lenders do care about now and why the caller couldn’t get a stated income loan is because reserve requirements are now three times stated income and the probably didn’t have it. If I have to pay income tax on my rentals or capital gains on sales as I go I haven’t cheated anybody on taxes.

Before If I am correct state income require a bank acct that showed a little cash flow. I got a 100% LTV state cash out and helor a few years ago so I could live in my hyperinflated house to pay for a splittable lot and start building my new house and sold that at the peak.

Ps: I edited this thing once I hit a key wrong or something and it got lost. I think it makes sense…gotta go.

[NotCranky]

I used stated incime because I don’t pay myself I am gorwing my RE holdings instead through sweat equity. I don’t take commission when I buy property. Because I would pay inocome and property taxes on it. I am not after money I am after solvency through rents. First step build my own hosue cash w/o pay. Second step use stated income loan to buy properties I see That I can work for free on for 1 year eating 20k of loan proceeds to live on. The things i bring the table in splitting lots,drawing my own plans , operating heavy equipment, and performing more thatn half of the construction and all the management of a house are worth at least 200k a year. I don’t feel bad stating my income at 50%LTV against my assets and nobody else cares.

What lenders do care about now and why the caller couldn’t get a stated income loan is because reserve requirements are now three times stated income and the probably didn’t have it. If I have to pay income tax on my rentals or capital gains on sales as I go I haven’t cheated anybody on taxes.

Before If I am correct state income require a bank acct that showed a little cash flow. I got a 100% LTV state cash out and helor a few years ago so I could live in my hyperinflated house to pay for a splittable lot and start building my new house and sold that at the peak.

Ps: I edited this thing once I hit a key wrong or something and it got lost. I think it makes sense…gotta go.

[NotCranky]

“Don’t really see the problem here. What they should also do is attach an inflation rider to the limits that should be reset yearly rather than having to review these during crisis situations.”

I see it differently. They are paving the way to make sure inflation doesn’t stay in the pocket of homedebtors but makes it back up the food chain to to the people who inflated the bubble in the first place. This is all part of the engineered “softer” landing. That ship that is big and hard to turn around. They are working on it.

[NotCranky]

“Don’t really see the problem here. What they should also do is attach an inflation rider to the limits that should be reset yearly rather than having to review these during crisis situations.”

I see it differently. They are paving the way to make sure inflation doesn’t stay in the pocket of homedebtors but makes it back up the food chain to to the people who inflated the bubble in the first place. This is all part of the engineered “softer” landing. That ship that is big and hard to turn around. They are working on it.

[NotCranky]

“Don’t really see the problem here. What they should also do is attach an inflation rider to the limits that should be reset yearly rather than having to review these during crisis situations.”

I see it differently. They are paving the way to make sure inflation doesn’t stay in the pocket of homedebtors but makes it back up the food chain to to the people who inflated the bubble in the first place. This is all part of the engineered “softer” landing. That ship that is big and hard to turn around. They are working on it.

[NotCranky]

“Don’t really see the problem here. What they should also do is attach an inflation rider to the limits that should be reset yearly rather than having to review these during crisis situations.”

I see it differently. They are paving the way to make sure inflation doesn’t stay in the pocket of homedebtors but makes it back up the food chain to to the people who inflated the bubble in the first place. This is all part of the engineered “softer” landing. That ship that is big and hard to turn around. They are working on it.

[NotCranky]

“Don’t really see the problem here. What they should also do is attach an inflation rider to the limits that should be reset yearly rather than having to review these during crisis situations.”

I see it differently. They are paving the way to make sure inflation doesn’t stay in the pocket of homedebtors but makes it back up the food chain to to the people who inflated the bubble in the first place. This is all part of the engineered “softer” landing. That ship that is big and hard to turn around. They are working on it.

[NotCranky]

I think more of the houses in City Height resemble the lesser quality houses in the other areas and there just are not very that are as good even as say an average to a little better in north park and Normal Height. The work and maintenance done over the years and even recently On City Heights homes Is on average lower even as compared to like houses in Normal Heights. That does not mean that some are not done well or that rescuing one should be out of the question. As far as nice well maintained or even more luxurious homes Normal Heights and North park win hands down.

I guess you might not be thinking Kensington. At the risk of alienating a few people who would grow ill to think of Kensington as part of the same neighborhood as Normal Heights, I do. In fact Kensington going south very quickly becomes like City Heights. I don’t remember what that little area in between is called but it is more like City Heights than Kensington. Stay closer to Adams and Kensington is like one of the the best parts of the Normal Heights/Kensington area. Go north of Adams to the rim of Mission Valley and Kensington is like a different world by comparison but that is the only place IMO.

Anyway even if you want to toss out Kensington the maintenance and improvements are on average better. There are many more nice houses on what you could almost call quiet streets. City Heights might have a few places like that. Cherokee point is similar to average places in the other two areas but it is right off University, which I consider a big negative.
I don’ think gentrification is the only difference, it is about percentages of varying qualities or houses. City heights is mostly lower but you do find City Heights type houses in 92116 and 92114 in large quantities too.

Are you wondering if you buy in City Heights if a next gentrification wave could make things equal. I doubt equal could be the result of that. I think more likely changes will be along the lines of “tear down and revitalization”. Like I said that could happen along El Cajon Blvd, anywhere on University too. Adams Ave. might not be imune to that but I don’t know of anything specific. As you probably know the proper function of eminent domain actions are in and out of the courts. I believe the planners will get what they want most of the time.

[NotCranky]

I think more of the houses in City Height resemble the lesser quality houses in the other areas and there just are not very that are as good even as say an average to a little better in north park and Normal Height. The work and maintenance done over the years and even recently On City Heights homes Is on average lower even as compared to like houses in Normal Heights. That does not mean that some are not done well or that rescuing one should be out of the question. As far as nice well maintained or even more luxurious homes Normal Heights and North park win hands down.

I guess you might not be thinking Kensington. At the risk of alienating a few people who would grow ill to think of Kensington as part of the same neighborhood as Normal Heights, I do. In fact Kensington going south very quickly becomes like City Heights. I don’t remember what that little area in between is called but it is more like City Heights than Kensington. Stay closer to Adams and Kensington is like one of the the best parts of the Normal Heights/Kensington area. Go north of Adams to the rim of Mission Valley and Kensington is like a different world by comparison but that is the only place IMO.

Anyway even if you want to toss out Kensington the maintenance and improvements are on average better. There are many more nice houses on what you could almost call quiet streets. City Heights might have a few places like that. Cherokee point is similar to average places in the other two areas but it is right off University, which I consider a big negative.
I don’ think gentrification is the only difference, it is about percentages of varying qualities or houses. City heights is mostly lower but you do find City Heights type houses in 92116 and 92114 in large quantities too.

Are you wondering if you buy in City Heights if a next gentrification wave could make things equal. I doubt equal could be the result of that. I think more likely changes will be along the lines of “tear down and revitalization”. Like I said that could happen along El Cajon Blvd, anywhere on University too. Adams Ave. might not be imune to that but I don’t know of anything specific. As you probably know the proper function of eminent domain actions are in and out of the courts. I believe the planners will get what they want most of the time.

[NotCranky]

I think more of the houses in City Height resemble the lesser quality houses in the other areas and there just are not very that are as good even as say an average to a little better in north park and Normal Height. The work and maintenance done over the years and even recently On City Heights homes Is on average lower even as compared to like houses in Normal Heights. That does not mean that some are not done well or that rescuing one should be out of the question. As far as nice well maintained or even more luxurious homes Normal Heights and North park win hands down.

I guess you might not be thinking Kensington. At the risk of alienating a few people who would grow ill to think of Kensington as part of the same neighborhood as Normal Heights, I do. In fact Kensington going south very quickly becomes like City Heights. I don’t remember what that little area in between is called but it is more like City Heights than Kensington. Stay closer to Adams and Kensington is like one of the the best parts of the Normal Heights/Kensington area. Go north of Adams to the rim of Mission Valley and Kensington is like a different world by comparison but that is the only place IMO.

Anyway even if you want to toss out Kensington the maintenance and improvements are on average better. There are many more nice houses on what you could almost call quiet streets. City Heights might have a few places like that. Cherokee point is similar to average places in the other two areas but it is right off University, which I consider a big negative.
I don’ think gentrification is the only difference, it is about percentages of varying qualities or houses. City heights is mostly lower but you do find City Heights type houses in 92116 and 92114 in large quantities too.

Are you wondering if you buy in City Heights if a next gentrification wave could make things equal. I doubt equal could be the result of that. I think more likely changes will be along the lines of “tear down and revitalization”. Like I said that could happen along El Cajon Blvd, anywhere on University too. Adams Ave. might not be imune to that but I don’t know of anything specific. As you probably know the proper function of eminent domain actions are in and out of the courts. I believe the planners will get what they want most of the time.

[NotCranky]

I think more of the houses in City Height resemble the lesser quality houses in the other areas and there just are not very that are as good even as say an average to a little better in north park and Normal Height. The work and maintenance done over the years and even recently On City Heights homes Is on average lower even as compared to like houses in Normal Heights. That does not mean that some are not done well or that rescuing one should be out of the question. As far as nice well maintained or even more luxurious homes Normal Heights and North park win hands down.

I guess you might not be thinking Kensington. At the risk of alienating a few people who would grow ill to think of Kensington as part of the same neighborhood as Normal Heights, I do. In fact Kensington going south very quickly becomes like City Heights. I don’t remember what that little area in between is called but it is more like City Heights than Kensington. Stay closer to Adams and Kensington is like one of the the best parts of the Normal Heights/Kensington area. Go north of Adams to the rim of Mission Valley and Kensington is like a different world by comparison but that is the only place IMO.

Anyway even if you want to toss out Kensington the maintenance and improvements are on average better. There are many more nice houses on what you could almost call quiet streets. City Heights might have a few places like that. Cherokee point is similar to average places in the other two areas but it is right off University, which I consider a big negative.
I don’ think gentrification is the only difference, it is about percentages of varying qualities or houses. City heights is mostly lower but you do find City Heights type houses in 92116 and 92114 in large quantities too.

Are you wondering if you buy in City Heights if a next gentrification wave could make things equal. I doubt equal could be the result of that. I think more likely changes will be along the lines of “tear down and revitalization”. Like I said that could happen along El Cajon Blvd, anywhere on University too. Adams Ave. might not be imune to that but I don’t know of anything specific. As you probably know the proper function of eminent domain actions are in and out of the courts. I believe the planners will get what they want most of the time.

[Author]

Posts