[temeculaguy]

There is a fundamental difference between 2003 and today. That difference is that more than half the american public understands the basics of what happened and the basic terminology. This will never slip by again. We on this site are an extremely small minority, a few years ago, the public in general had no idea what was happening and I found that there were only one or two people in my world who I could have conversation about it with. Today, I can talk to any schmuck sitting next to me in a bar and he can keep up with a conversation about subprime, mbs, cds, alt a, fannie, freddie, etc.

The American people are interested, therefore the mass media is interested and that is why returning to 2003 will not happen anytime soon, no matter who is in office, there is just too much attention being paid right now.

We are just days away from an election and I have not heard any of the 20 or so people I talked totoday mention abortion, gun control, iraq or any of the other things that elections usually bring up. Almost every conversation was financial, including people who previously knew very little about the system. This cat can’t be put back in the bag.

[temeculaguy]

There is a fundamental difference between 2003 and today. That difference is that more than half the american public understands the basics of what happened and the basic terminology. This will never slip by again. We on this site are an extremely small minority, a few years ago, the public in general had no idea what was happening and I found that there were only one or two people in my world who I could have conversation about it with. Today, I can talk to any schmuck sitting next to me in a bar and he can keep up with a conversation about subprime, mbs, cds, alt a, fannie, freddie, etc.

The American people are interested, therefore the mass media is interested and that is why returning to 2003 will not happen anytime soon, no matter who is in office, there is just too much attention being paid right now.

We are just days away from an election and I have not heard any of the 20 or so people I talked totoday mention abortion, gun control, iraq or any of the other things that elections usually bring up. Almost every conversation was financial, including people who previously knew very little about the system. This cat can’t be put back in the bag.

[temeculaguy]

There is a fundamental difference between 2003 and today. That difference is that more than half the american public understands the basics of what happened and the basic terminology. This will never slip by again. We on this site are an extremely small minority, a few years ago, the public in general had no idea what was happening and I found that there were only one or two people in my world who I could have conversation about it with. Today, I can talk to any schmuck sitting next to me in a bar and he can keep up with a conversation about subprime, mbs, cds, alt a, fannie, freddie, etc.

The American people are interested, therefore the mass media is interested and that is why returning to 2003 will not happen anytime soon, no matter who is in office, there is just too much attention being paid right now.

We are just days away from an election and I have not heard any of the 20 or so people I talked totoday mention abortion, gun control, iraq or any of the other things that elections usually bring up. Almost every conversation was financial, including people who previously knew very little about the system. This cat can’t be put back in the bag.

[temeculaguy]

There is a fundamental difference between 2003 and today. That difference is that more than half the american public understands the basics of what happened and the basic terminology. This will never slip by again. We on this site are an extremely small minority, a few years ago, the public in general had no idea what was happening and I found that there were only one or two people in my world who I could have conversation about it with. Today, I can talk to any schmuck sitting next to me in a bar and he can keep up with a conversation about subprime, mbs, cds, alt a, fannie, freddie, etc.

The American people are interested, therefore the mass media is interested and that is why returning to 2003 will not happen anytime soon, no matter who is in office, there is just too much attention being paid right now.

We are just days away from an election and I have not heard any of the 20 or so people I talked totoday mention abortion, gun control, iraq or any of the other things that elections usually bring up. Almost every conversation was financial, including people who previously knew very little about the system. This cat can’t be put back in the bag.

[temeculaguy]

First off, 6% isn’t today’s rate, secondly with all properties there are variances in taxes, mello roos, hoa, etc. Esmith points out medians are running about 190x rent, which is not a wise investment. Use the 100-150x rent multiplier as the “range.” Adjust within tha range after factoring the taxes, hoa, age of the property, vacancy rate and projected vacancy. This is what you should use evaluate as a rental property. To purchase, similar parameters can be used because investors will compete with you at those levels. Personally I think you should shoot for 2001 pricing as the ultimate goal for protection with 2003 as a worst case scenario. Keep in mind that r/e investors are few and far between right now, lenders are tightening so that buyers of investment properties have to qualify without counting rent as income as defense againt preforeclure downsizers.

A $1400 rental is still at the high end of the scale at 200k, keep in mind, investors can use pure math, they can invest anywhere in the country, seeking the best mathematical scenario, they don’t need to live there or go to the schools or commute, it’s far less personal for them and mom and pop investors are drying up.

I can buy a $1400/mo rental right now for $165k, not in RB, so why would I pay 200k for the same return, sub 125x rent multiplier can be found elsewhere, therefore, rb is still overpriced at 200k, 150-175 will come and it will be very compelling at those numbers.

[temeculaguy]

First off, 6% isn’t today’s rate, secondly with all properties there are variances in taxes, mello roos, hoa, etc. Esmith points out medians are running about 190x rent, which is not a wise investment. Use the 100-150x rent multiplier as the “range.” Adjust within tha range after factoring the taxes, hoa, age of the property, vacancy rate and projected vacancy. This is what you should use evaluate as a rental property. To purchase, similar parameters can be used because investors will compete with you at those levels. Personally I think you should shoot for 2001 pricing as the ultimate goal for protection with 2003 as a worst case scenario. Keep in mind that r/e investors are few and far between right now, lenders are tightening so that buyers of investment properties have to qualify without counting rent as income as defense againt preforeclure downsizers.

A $1400 rental is still at the high end of the scale at 200k, keep in mind, investors can use pure math, they can invest anywhere in the country, seeking the best mathematical scenario, they don’t need to live there or go to the schools or commute, it’s far less personal for them and mom and pop investors are drying up.

I can buy a $1400/mo rental right now for $165k, not in RB, so why would I pay 200k for the same return, sub 125x rent multiplier can be found elsewhere, therefore, rb is still overpriced at 200k, 150-175 will come and it will be very compelling at those numbers.

[temeculaguy]

First off, 6% isn’t today’s rate, secondly with all properties there are variances in taxes, mello roos, hoa, etc. Esmith points out medians are running about 190x rent, which is not a wise investment. Use the 100-150x rent multiplier as the “range.” Adjust within tha range after factoring the taxes, hoa, age of the property, vacancy rate and projected vacancy. This is what you should use evaluate as a rental property. To purchase, similar parameters can be used because investors will compete with you at those levels. Personally I think you should shoot for 2001 pricing as the ultimate goal for protection with 2003 as a worst case scenario. Keep in mind that r/e investors are few and far between right now, lenders are tightening so that buyers of investment properties have to qualify without counting rent as income as defense againt preforeclure downsizers.

A $1400 rental is still at the high end of the scale at 200k, keep in mind, investors can use pure math, they can invest anywhere in the country, seeking the best mathematical scenario, they don’t need to live there or go to the schools or commute, it’s far less personal for them and mom and pop investors are drying up.

I can buy a $1400/mo rental right now for $165k, not in RB, so why would I pay 200k for the same return, sub 125x rent multiplier can be found elsewhere, therefore, rb is still overpriced at 200k, 150-175 will come and it will be very compelling at those numbers.

[temeculaguy]

First off, 6% isn’t today’s rate, secondly with all properties there are variances in taxes, mello roos, hoa, etc. Esmith points out medians are running about 190x rent, which is not a wise investment. Use the 100-150x rent multiplier as the “range.” Adjust within tha range after factoring the taxes, hoa, age of the property, vacancy rate and projected vacancy. This is what you should use evaluate as a rental property. To purchase, similar parameters can be used because investors will compete with you at those levels. Personally I think you should shoot for 2001 pricing as the ultimate goal for protection with 2003 as a worst case scenario. Keep in mind that r/e investors are few and far between right now, lenders are tightening so that buyers of investment properties have to qualify without counting rent as income as defense againt preforeclure downsizers.

A $1400 rental is still at the high end of the scale at 200k, keep in mind, investors can use pure math, they can invest anywhere in the country, seeking the best mathematical scenario, they don’t need to live there or go to the schools or commute, it’s far less personal for them and mom and pop investors are drying up.

I can buy a $1400/mo rental right now for $165k, not in RB, so why would I pay 200k for the same return, sub 125x rent multiplier can be found elsewhere, therefore, rb is still overpriced at 200k, 150-175 will come and it will be very compelling at those numbers.

[temeculaguy]

First off, 6% isn’t today’s rate, secondly with all properties there are variances in taxes, mello roos, hoa, etc. Esmith points out medians are running about 190x rent, which is not a wise investment. Use the 100-150x rent multiplier as the “range.” Adjust within tha range after factoring the taxes, hoa, age of the property, vacancy rate and projected vacancy. This is what you should use evaluate as a rental property. To purchase, similar parameters can be used because investors will compete with you at those levels. Personally I think you should shoot for 2001 pricing as the ultimate goal for protection with 2003 as a worst case scenario. Keep in mind that r/e investors are few and far between right now, lenders are tightening so that buyers of investment properties have to qualify without counting rent as income as defense againt preforeclure downsizers.

A $1400 rental is still at the high end of the scale at 200k, keep in mind, investors can use pure math, they can invest anywhere in the country, seeking the best mathematical scenario, they don’t need to live there or go to the schools or commute, it’s far less personal for them and mom and pop investors are drying up.

I can buy a $1400/mo rental right now for $165k, not in RB, so why would I pay 200k for the same return, sub 125x rent multiplier can be found elsewhere, therefore, rb is still overpriced at 200k, 150-175 will come and it will be very compelling at those numbers.

[temeculaguy]

actually that last site ended up being from a group of mormons who oppose 8, so now it has to be taken with a grain of salt, see this is why I hate politics.

[temeculaguy]

actually that last site ended up being from a group of mormons who oppose 8, so now it has to be taken with a grain of salt, see this is why I hate politics.

[temeculaguy]

actually that last site ended up being from a group of mormons who oppose 8, so now it has to be taken with a grain of salt, see this is why I hate politics.

[temeculaguy]

actually that last site ended up being from a group of mormons who oppose 8, so now it has to be taken with a grain of salt, see this is why I hate politics.

[temeculaguy]

actually that last site ended up being from a group of mormons who oppose 8, so now it has to be taken with a grain of salt, see this is why I hate politics.

[temeculaguy]

I hate the political threads but I’m jumping in at my own peril because I have decided that prop 8 bothers me on a few levels.

This is just about telling people that they aren’t good enough, that pisses people off. If it was an option and had been one for years, it probably wouldn’t be that prevalent. There was a time that the voters wouldn’t have approved of interacial marriage, times change, most people change, some church people are the last to change.

For the most part, marriage is horrible institution, why should gays be spared the pleasures of divorce, alimony and legal fees. If that’s what they want, have at at, you’ll be sorry but in this country we all have the right to ruin our own lives, who am I to stand in their way. In fact, I’d love to switch with them, let’s have heterosexual civil unions, I’d love to say that to my girlfriend “hey babe, I’d love to marry you, but it is illegal, so until the law changes, we have sex and you get none of my stuff.”

All of the threats from the yes 8 commercial are faulty, the cases of being sued or losing tax exempt status were exceptions. One case in particular was a pavillion, affiliated with a church, that was available for rent to the public for any function except for gay weddings. That example is being used to scare churches. Actual churches can make whatever rules they want but once you rent to the public (outside the church members) you cannot discriminate, with or without this prop. That misleading ad is the biggest reason I’m against it, I hate the lies.

I do have to give credit to the mormons, even though they have supplied more than a third of the funding for yes on 8, they have been vocal about how some of the ads and e-mails are false. This website, mormons for marriage desribes some of the lies being spewed, kudos to them for being honest.

http://www.mormonsformarriage.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/mat-responses-to-six-consequences-if-prop-8-fails-rev-1-1.pdf

[Author]

Posts