# Coming Eviction Tsunami



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Just watch a show

1/3 of renters -36%- (just renters not home owners) did not making July rent.. that is about 28,000,000 americans

stats show that people that missed one month tend to miss the next month also

During the Great Recession of 2007-2009--approximately 10 million people lost their homes. Of course, that crisis played out over the course of several years. Now, that figure could reach 28 million people between now and September, in the span of just over a month.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

This is why shut down orders with poor science substituting as fact is beyond negligent. Evidently having Millions more living under a bridge and on assistance roles is better.


----------



## Robie (Jun 2, 2016)

Camel923 said:


> This is why shut down orders with poor science substituting as fact is beyond negligent. Evidently having Millions more living under a bridge and on assistance roles is better.


When it's part of the plan to get more people relying on Uncle Sam, cradle to grave....it's perfect.

Expect to see low income housing starting to take over all the high-rise office buildings in major cities also.

With more and more people working from home, a lot of the office space is empty...and will remain that way with this new & improved "pandemic".


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Many states will pass a law banning evictions, heck in many a Judge can deny one for any reason he wants already. Property owners will be forced to eat the loss.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Camel923 said:


> ............Evidently having Millions more living under a bridge and on assistance roles is better.


For those wanting total and complete control over the US population, it is.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

I agree, this will be very similar to the housing mortgage situation of 2007/2008. Tax Payers, Banks and Building Owners will get hurt. Occupants will be able to "squat" rent free. Many building owners will simply walk away. More multi-family buildings will crop up supported by HUGE government subsidies. The only good side will be the Repair and Renovation Market will benefit...short term.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

I've got friends in this situation and what sucks is its through no fault of their own. Overnight they went from making 70+k per year as managers to unemployment when corporate shut down their restaurants and some have even lost more as corporate decided their restaurants aren't going to reopen. The icing on the cake is they are having trouble finding another job as almost every where around here is on a hiring freeze due to COVID. I don't know who originally said this is on the scale of the Great Depression but they're right, especially since the idiots in charge are starting to lock it down again.


----------



## Robie (Jun 2, 2016)

NotTooProudToHide said:


> I've got friends in this situation and what sucks is its through no fault of their own. Overnight they went from making 70+k per year as managers to unemployment when corporate shut down their restaurants and some have even lost more as corporate decided their restaurants aren't going to reopen. The icing on the cake is they are having trouble finding another job as almost every where around here is on a hiring freeze due to COVID. I don't know who originally said this is on the scale of the Great Depression but they're right, especially since the idiots in charge are starting to lock it down again.


Planned.

Your friends?

Collateral damge.


----------



## paulag1955 (Dec 15, 2019)

Camel923 said:


> This is why shut down orders with poor science substituting as fact is beyond negligent. Evidently having Millions more living under a bridge and on assistance roles is better.


Absolutely it's better for the Democrats.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Smitty901 said:


> Many states will pass a law banning evictions, heck in many a Judge can deny one for any reason he wants already. Property owners will be forced to eat the loss.


Which of course will increase foreclosures. As a former owner of rentals, I can tell you that most of us aren't rich, and cannot absorb such a loss for long.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Robie said:


> Planned.
> 
> Your friends?
> 
> Collateral damge.


Makes you sick doesn't it? Meanwhile that smug SOB sits at his daily COVID briefings convinced of how smart he is and what a good job he's doing.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

We have not begun to see the economic impact the China bug has wrought. It's not so much the bug as it is the people leveraging it for their own political agenda. The more desperate and destitute the masses, the more willing they will be to except socialism as the solution.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

StratMaster said:


> Which of course will increase foreclosures. As a former owner of rentals, I can tell you that most of us aren't rich, and cannot absorb such a loss for long.


 Democrats don't care . They will take your property and give it to someone else. It has already happened in places and will happen again. You will comply. In places like Madison as a property owner you have no rights .


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

StratMaster said:


> Which of course will increase foreclosures. As a former owner of rentals, I can tell you that most of us aren't rich, and cannot absorb such a loss for long.


I said that to a friend yesterday

renters can not pay rent, landlords can not pay mortgages, banks can not pay loans


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Smitty901 said:


> Democrats don't care . They will take your property and give it to someone else. It has already happened in places and will happen again. You will comply. In places like Madison as a property owner you have no rights .


I won't comply... as I am retired and out of the business. My equity is now in gold, silver, guns, ammo, food, supplies, and cash. I feel terrible though for those hard working, industrious American who own leveraged properties in these liberal controlled areas.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

StratMaster said:


> I won't comply... as I am retired and out of the business. My equity is now in gold, silver, guns, ammo, food, supplies, and cash. I feel terrible though for those hard working, industrious American who own leveraged properties in these liberal controlled areas.


 Sadly this is what the American people want. Unless a large part of the population wake up fast they will have it. Even many that claim to be Conservative want the free stuff . They have convinced them self that it is ok to vote for the free stuff .
Telling them self it won't go that far, I will get free healthcare and free public transportation . The rest of this socialist stuff won't ever happen.
I have a second home on the farm. It is the house that has been here back as far as the late/mid 1800's. Of course it has been remolded a lot. I have over he years let others live there. People some times hit hard times. Never charged or except a penny in rent. Some ask me why I did not rent it out. I never wanted to be a land lord and deal with all the laws and crap that goes with it. Nothing has changed my way of thinking over the years.

Hand chopped logs/beams still in the walls of the original part of the house. Son lives there now when he is here. Not a big house but not a bad place.


----------



## TenMileHunter (May 20, 2017)

And I continue to pray for our nation.

TMH 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dondiablo (Jul 23, 2020)

Tsunami? Another day in 2020...


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

This morning I had fasting labs after which I decided to go get some breakfast. On my way I noticed the lack of traffic during the normal morning rush. I went to our local Shoney's because I was starving, there where 2 other cars in the parking lot, a total of 3 customers during prime time. On my way home I paid attention and saw that even the drive throughs that are normally packed this time of morning had barley any traffic, including Chic Fil A. I've got a bad feeling that we haven't come close to seeing the peak of the negative economic impact of the kung flu, how the media covers it, and government response to it.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> I said that to a friend yesterday
> 
> renters can not pay rent, landlords can not pay mortgages, banks can not pay loans


Which is why nobody but dirt-dumb people buy rentals on credit. Pay cash for rentals or don't buy them. You know why? This is why.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

stevekozak said:


> Which is why nobody but dirt-dumb people buy rentals on credit. Pay cash for rentals or don't buy them. You know why? This is why.


Good point. And if you have the cash, you have options.

The last rental unit I bought was a condo in a college town. It listed for 42k, I paid 38k. I deposited that amount in one of the local banks, got the loan from the bank with zero down and a 5 Year ARM.

I put about 1k and some sweat equity into the place, rented it for 600/month with a 320/month payment. Sold it somewhere close to 50K a couple of years later. I didn't get rich but I've had worst deals! (Lost a ton of equity in one property in 2012! Win some, lose some!) lain:


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

stevekozak said:


> Which is why nobody but dirt-dumb people buy rentals on credit. Pay cash for rentals or don't buy them. You know why? This is why.


I bought plenty of rentals with credit in the 80's... a total of 11 rental properties (and one horse ranch, one piece of river front Oregon property @42 acres, and one commercial building) . There was a depressed market, and I was picking up foreclosed duplexes for under $38K. Made twice my mortgage in rent income. My "dirt dumb" idiot ass made around $700K in this venture alone. Leveraging credit was THE way to make money in real estate. Paying full price one had to be A) rich already, and B) ignorant of leveraging principles and the nature of the money market. An investment of around $3600, a relatively LOW risk, netted me on average around $60K per property when I sold. Fact is, MOST people investing in real estate did so by leveraging their small investment: otherwise, there's no point in it. 1) Buy low 2) Buy with as little money invested as possible 3) Have the tenants pay your mortgage 4) Take advantage of tax incentives, such as depreciation, to take a paper LOSS on each property... sheltering some of your other income 5) Hold properties obtained in a depressed area until it recovers, and realize the rise in value when sold. It's a LOT of work, but this is how it's done. Paying CASH for a property is not an investment... it is buying a job.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

I know nothing about all this high finance. Now, low women on the other hand...............................:devil:


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

No doubt some landlords will make a fortune off the pandemic evictions. They'll get rid of less-than-desirable tenants, bump up the rent (bypassing rent control legislation) and rake in the dough.

Repossessions will be the same. Joe Sixpack bought his house with a 30-year mortgage. Been paying on it for 20 years now. Suddenly can't make the payments so the bank forecloses, takes his house along with his equity and sells it for twice what Joe paid for it. Tidy little profit for the banker. Might be able to buy a 40-ft yacht instead of a 20.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Back Pack Hack said:


> No doubt some landlords will make a fortune off the pandemic evictions. They'll get rid of less-than-desirable tenants, bump up the rent (bypassing rent control legislation) and rake in the dough.
> 
> Repossessions will be the same. Joe Sixpack bought his house with a 30-year mortgage. Been paying on it for 20 years now. Suddenly can't make the payments so the bank forecloses, takes his house along with his equity and sells it for twice what Joe paid for it. Tidy little profit for the banker. Might be able to buy a 40-ft yacht instead of a 20.


This is how some made a serious amount of money doing this during the depression.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Back Pack Hack said:


> No doubt some landlords will make a fortune off the pandemic evictions. They'll get rid of less-than-desirable tenants, bump up the rent (bypassing rent control legislation) and rake in the dough.
> 
> Repossessions will be the same. Joe Sixpack bought his house with a 30-year mortgage. Been paying on it for 20 years now. Suddenly can't make the payments so the bank forecloses, takes his house along with his equity and sells it for twice what Joe paid for it. Tidy little profit for the banker. Might be able to buy a 40-ft yacht instead of a 20.


Could be true in some cases. The other side of that same coin:
Many landlords are going to LOSE their rentals, just the same as any other mortgagee. People not paying rent means owners cannot pay mortgages. Most landlords are NOT wealthy... they run a business which requires income to sustain itself. A great MANY people not able to pay rent means much higher vacancy rates, and landlords competing for a much smaller pool of customers at lower rental rates. A glut of empty rentals does not benefit the landlord. Ditto banks: We all saw the same thing in the 80's (although before this all shakes out, I believe the present circumstances will prove to be far WORSE). Every real estate broker with thick binders of distressed, repossessed properties... the paper all held by panicked lenders, some private bank loans, many backed by a beleaguered Veteran's Loan program. The amount of physical decay a property undergoes when uninhabited is severe. Banks repossessing these properties are watching them ROT, and not gleeful. Because there is a glut of them, they are NOT selling them and making a profit... and if too many, they can't sell them at ALL. They are desperate to dump them, and gladly look at any offer. The duplexes and triplexes I bought in the 80's were sold to me for the balance owed only. They were desperate to get these bad loans and depreciating properties they were buried in off their books. This is going to be a unique scenario. Not a housing bubble finally bursting, but an entirely different animal: Wages and wealth production artificially suspended by fiat decree. So sure, some may make money out there as a result. But your average landlord is going to be screwed just the same as any other business. If the loan default level approaches 20%, the banks are going to be taking big losses as well. Not many winners. Glad I'm retired and pretty much out of it: I only have one property left which I am taking payments on. And, unlike many, I am in a position to carry the buyer for a long while if needed because I own it outright with no mortgage. Would not have been able to do that when I was younger, and carrying multiple mortgages.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

StratMaster said:


> Could be true in some cases. The other side of that same coin:
> Many landlords are going to LOSE their rentals, just the same as any other mortgagee. People not paying rent means owners cannot pay mortgages. Most landlords are NOT wealthy... they run a business which requires income to sustain itself. A great MANY people not able to pay rent means much higher vacancy rates, and landlords competing for a much smaller pool of customers at lower rental rates. A glut of empty rentals does not benefit the landlord...........


Any landlord with a portfolio of any size that depends on a 100% tenancy rate to crack the nut is just _pretending_ to run a business. Failure with a capital F.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Back Pack Hack said:


> Any landlord with a portfolio of any size that depends on a 100% tenancy rate to crack the nut is just _pretending_ to run a business. Failure with a capital F.


I find this to be a non sequitur, and am not sure how this responds to my comments. But yes, of course landlords do have a vacancy rate apportioned into their business plan. Those of us who had owned properties through lean times adhered to a higher vacancy rate expectation in our plan. And just like a local market or nail salon, they cannot survive a rate triple that amount or worse for an extended time period. Just. Like. Any. Other. Business. I hope you don't mind me saying: you seem to maybe have some personal issues with landlords, or real estate investing, and possibly some misconceptions going as well. You have every right to an opinion. I have no desire to try and alter it. It worked very well for me, over about a 35 year period.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

StratMaster said:


> I find this to be a non sequitur, and am not sure how this responds to my comments. But yes, of course landlords do have a vacancy rate apportioned into their business plan. Those of us who had owned properties through lean times adhered to a higher vacancy rate expectation in our plan. And just like a local market or nail salon, they cannot survive a rate triple that amount or worse for an extended time period. Just. Like. Any. Other. Business. I hope you don't mind me saying: you seem to maybe have some personal issues with landlords, or real estate investing, and possibly some misconceptions going as well. You have every right to an opinion. I have no desire to try and alter it. It worked very well for me, over about a 35 year period.


Now why would you think I 'have personal issues' with landlords?


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

StratMaster said:


> I bought plenty of rentals with credit in the 80's... a total of 11 rental properties (and one horse ranch, one piece of river front Oregon property @42 acres, and one commercial building) . There was a depressed market, and I was picking up foreclosed duplexes for under $38K. Made twice my mortgage in rent income. My "dirt dumb" idiot ass made around $700K in this venture alone. Leveraging credit was THE way to make money in real estate. Paying full price one had to be A) rich already, and B) ignorant of leveraging principles and the nature of the money market. An investment of around $3600, a relatively LOW risk, netted me on average around $60K per property when I sold. Fact is, MOST people investing in real estate did so by leveraging their small investment: otherwise, there's no point in it. 1) Buy low 2) Buy with as little money invested as possible 3) Have the tenants pay your mortgage 4) Take advantage of tax incentives, such as depreciation, to take a paper LOSS on each property... sheltering some of your other income 5) Hold properties obtained in a depressed area until it recovers, and realize the rise in value when sold. It's a LOT of work, but this is how it's done. Paying CASH for a property is not an investment... it is buying a job.


I respect you, Dude, but you are wrong. I am ok with that. I am happy your risk worked out for you. It didn't for a lot of people. You might handle snakes all your life and never get bitten, but the averages say it is unlikely.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Back Pack Hack said:


> No doubt some landlords will make a fortune off the pandemic evictions. They'll get rid of less-than-desirable tenants, bump up the rent (bypassing rent control legislation) and rake in the dough.
> 
> Repossessions will be the same. Joe Sixpack bought his house with a 30-year mortgage. Been paying on it for 20 years now. Suddenly can't make the payments so the bank forecloses, takes his house along with his equity and sells it for twice what Joe paid for it. Tidy little profit for the banker. Might be able to buy a 40-ft yacht instead of a 20.


If Joe had gotten after it, and paid that 30 year like a 15 year, he would have a paid for house, tons of equity, 5 years of mortgage payments in his savings account and sitting pretty why all the other slobs are sweating it. Just saying.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

stevekozak said:


> If Joe had gotten after it, and paid that 30 year like a 15 year, he would have a paid for house, tons of equity, 5 years of mortgage payments in his savings account and sitting pretty why all the other slobs are sweating it. Just saying.


Not everyone lives in a perfect world.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Back Pack Hack said:


> Not everyone lives in a perfect world.


Nope, but I have noticed the ones who do tend to be the ones who tried. What is that old childhood saying? "Can't never could."


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

stevekozak said:


> I respect you, Dude, but you are wrong. I am ok with that. I am happy your risk worked out for you. It didn't for a lot of people. You might handle snakes all your life and never get bitten, but the averages say it is unlikely.


Respect right back atcha! However, to say "you are wrong" is a mere unsubstantiated assertion, and entirely insufficient as even a ghost of an argument. You would have to delineate principals which prove that assertion... not just merely assert it. If I am wrong, I was wrong for 35 years, through good and bad economic times... and rewarded generously for it. Ditto all the many other families in my area doing it just as successfully. People don't avoid real estate because of RISK: they avoid it because it is too much work over too long a period. I was immersed in it completely. Understood what I was doing, and nothing short of an economic disaster could have stopped me... a disaster which would have wiped out everyone else as well, even those invested in stocks, mutual funds, or bonds. Sure, I know a couple guys who didn't do so well... but THEY did it "wrong". Didn't understand the business. Bought wrong, didn't mitigate for loss of revenue, didn't do the work, exceeded leverage limits to cash flow ratios, and didn't understand how to make money. Fact remains: most millionaires which were ever created in this country did it through real estate. I'm happy to be wrong among them. Leveraging money has one OTHER great aspect over and above all the others I have already listed: it limits your risk. Were I to somehow lose a duplex (never did), I would be out $3600. Big deal. Were I to have lost ALL my properties... every one... I could still start over the very next day with the same principals. And another advantage: the tax codes were set up to ENCOURAGE capital investment and new businesses... ESPECIALLY real estate. These codes too greatly mitigated risk. I'm curious now though as to WHY you hold such a strong position: ever owned a rental property? Because the view from the outside is VERY different from that of the inside. Cheers!


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Credit is not about buying what you can not afford. It is about using other money to make money and or limit your risk.


----------



## BamaDOC (Feb 5, 2020)

StratMaster said:


> I bought plenty of rentals with credit in the 80's... a total of 11 rental properties (and one horse ranch, one piece of river front Oregon property @42 acres, and one commercial building) . There was a depressed market, and I was picking up foreclosed duplexes for under $38K. Made twice my mortgage in rent income. My "dirt dumb" idiot ass made around $700K in this venture alone. Leveraging credit was THE way to make money in real estate. Paying full price one had to be A) rich already, and B) ignorant of leveraging principles and the nature of the money market. An investment of around $3600, a relatively LOW risk, netted me on average around $60K per property when I sold. Fact is, MOST people investing in real estate did so by leveraging their small investment: otherwise, there's no point in it. 1) Buy low 2) Buy with as little money invested as possible 3) Have the tenants pay your mortgage 4) Take advantage of tax incentives, such as depreciation, to take a paper LOSS on each property... sheltering some of your other income 5) Hold properties obtained in a depressed area until it recovers, and realize the rise in value when sold. It's a LOT of work, but this is how it's done. Paying CASH for a property is not an investment... it is buying a job.


sounds like you did it the right way...
growing up.. my parents were 'slumlords/landlords'.. renting out properties..
I hated it because it meant most of my weekends were spent fixing up properties every weekend and many nights with my dad and brother.
I realized how much work it takes to maintain a property especially an older one... but how much money you save by doing it yourself and avoiding the 'contractor tax'
I've been thinking of taking some of my investment money and doing what you have successfully done...
but I remember how many toilets i had to unclog, how many leaky faucets I had to fix, and the invariable broken furnace in the middle of the night...
respect to you for the discipline and the hard work ... you earned every penny.


----------



## BamaDOC (Feb 5, 2020)

Prepared One said:


> I know nothing about all this high finance. Now, low women on the other hand...............................:devil:


 @Prepared One 
HAHAHAAAAAAA.... maybe you can edumacate me a little on the low woman thing....


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

BamaDOC said:


> sounds like you did it the right way...
> growing up.. my parents were 'slumlords/landlords'.. renting out properties..
> I hated it because it meant most of my weekends were spent fixing up properties every weekend and many nights with my dad and brother.
> I realized how much work it takes to maintain a property especially an older one... but how much money you save by doing it yourself and avoiding the 'contractor tax'
> ...


Yep! Spent a LOT of my weekends (even though I had a regular job, about 60 hours a week) painting, fixing toilets, or showing the places to new renters. It isn't, by ANY stretch of the imagination, a free ride or easy money. It's a venture which requires a lot of attention.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

BamaDOC said:


> sounds like you did it the right way...
> growing up.. my parents were 'slumlords/landlords'.. renting out properties..
> I hated it because it meant most of my weekends were spent fixing up properties every weekend and many nights with my dad and brother.
> I realized how much work it takes to maintain a property especially an older one... but how much money you save by doing it yourself and avoiding the 'contractor tax'
> ...


Well, if you decide to, this time all the rewards will be for YOU and your family. I started the easy way: bought a nice duplex and moved into it when I was about 26. Wasn't much trouble to rent the other side and keep an eye on it. Got me started.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

BamaDOC said:


> sounds like you did it the right way...
> growing up.. my parents were 'slumlords/landlords'.. renting out properties..
> I hated it because it meant most of my weekends were spent fixing up properties every weekend and many nights with my dad and brother.
> I realized how much work it takes to maintain a property especially an older one... but how much money you save by doing it yourself and avoiding the 'contractor tax'
> ...


I happen to be one of the sources of that 'contractor tax', being one myself.

I have 11 regular customers who are landlords. Only two of them I would consider 'slumlords', calling me in only when they're faced with a problem they cannot diagnose or remedy themselves. The other 9, however, never bother attempting DIY. They call whatever professional they need to fix the problem, whether it be a leaky faucet or leaky roof. Those 9 are the most successful, one of which has about 60 properties.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

BamaDOC said:


> @Prepared One
> HAHAHAAAAAAA.... maybe you can edumacate me a little on the low woman thing....


Sure! I used to be a pro at finding low women in low places. You know the type. Smoking hot body, would curl your toes and blow your mind in bed, then two weeks later she is chasing you down the driveway with a butcher knife. Ahhhhhh, good times. :tango_face_grin:


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Back Pack Hack said:


> I happen to be one of the sources of that 'contractor tax', being one myself.
> 
> I have 11 regular customers who are landlords. Only two of them I would consider 'slumlords', calling me in only when they're faced with a problem they cannot diagnose or remedy themselves. The other 9, however, never bother attempting DIY. They call whatever professional they need to fix the problem, whether it be a leaky faucet or leaky roof. Those 9 are the most successful, one of which has about 60 properties.


Sure. At some point, it becomes impossible to do DIY. Being a relatively little fish with 11 duplexes and triplexes, I was able to handle most of it myself. With 60? No way. I had a full time job too.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

StratMaster said:


> Respect right back atcha! However, to say "you are wrong" is a mere unsubstantiated assertion, and entirely insufficient as even a ghost of an argument. You would have to delineate principals which prove that assertion... not just merely assert it. If I am wrong, I was wrong for 35 years, through good and bad economic times... and rewarded generously for it. Ditto all the many other families in my area doing it just as successfully. People don't avoid real estate because of RISK: they avoid it because it is too much work over too long a period. I was immersed in it completely. Understood what I was doing, and nothing short of an economic disaster could have stopped me... a disaster which would have wiped out everyone else as well, even those invested in stocks, mutual funds, or bonds. Sure, I know a couple guys who didn't do so well... but THEY did it "wrong". Didn't understand the business. Bought wrong, didn't mitigate for loss of revenue, didn't do the work, exceeded leverage limits to cash flow ratios, and didn't understand how to make money. Fact remains: most millionaires which were ever created in this country did it through real estate. I'm happy to be wrong among them. Leveraging money has one OTHER great aspect over and above all the others I have already listed: it limits your risk. Were I to somehow lose a duplex (never did), I would be out $3600. Big deal. Were I to have lost ALL my properties... every one... I could still start over the very next day with the same principals. And another advantage: the tax codes were set up to ENCOURAGE capital investment and new businesses... ESPECIALLY real estate. These codes too greatly mitigated risk. I'm curious now though as to WHY you hold such a strong position: ever owned a rental property? Because the view from the outside is VERY different from that of the inside. Cheers!


You are right that I should not have just said "your wrong." It was a general statement and, as such, was asinine. Accept my apologies on that. I have not ever owned rental property, and probably never will, as the idea of landlording does not appeal to me. My strong positions have nothing to do with real estate, really, I am just staunchly anti-debt. I am not mad at anyone who wants to dabble in that, I just have no desire to handle snakes, unnecessarily. There are a great number of people who have leveraged themselves into the poorhouse. I will say that when this current "pandemic" situation came to pass, I was extremely happy to be 100% debt-free and to owe nobody anything (well, Uncle Sam is always going to try to get his little piece of my pie, but that is what it is). I have seen a lot of people panicking and depressed not being able to pay the notes that 6 months ago were afterthoughts. Debt-free is a solid rock on which to stand during hard times.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Credit is not about buying what you can not afford. It is about using other money to make money and or limit your risk.


Anytime you borrow money, there is going to be someone looking for that money. Sometimes you have that money, and sometimes things go to hell and you don't. There is ALWAYS risk. That risk may or may not be acceptable to a person. I prefer to avoid as much risk as possible.


----------



## BamaDOC (Feb 5, 2020)

Prepared One said:


> .....then two weeks later she is chasing you down the driveway with a butcher knife. Ahhhhhh, good times. :tango_face_grin:


 @Prepared One

wow ... you really know how to sell it!!!
count me in!!!


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

stevekozak said:


> You are right that I should not have just said "your wrong." It was a general statement and, as such, was asinine. Accept my apologies on that. I have not ever owned rental property, and probably never will, as the idea of landlording does not appeal to me. My strong positions have nothing to do with real estate, really, I am just staunchly anti-debt. I am not mad at anyone who wants to dabble in that, I just have no desire to handle snakes, unnecessarily. There are a great number of people who have leveraged themselves into the poorhouse. I will say that when this current "pandemic" situation came to pass, I was extremely happy to be 100% debt-free and to owe nobody anything (well, Uncle Sam is always going to try to get his little piece of my pie, but that is what it is). I have seen a lot of people panicking and depressed not being able to pay the notes that 6 months ago were afterthoughts. Debt-free is a solid rock on which to stand during hard times.


I enjoy our comments back and forth (it's why I'm here!) and you were NEVER "asinine". Never once. And kudos for being 100% debt-free, not many people attain that. Very very wise, and was my goal too. I too have been debt-free for maybe 10 years now, having sold all my properties. I have the one left, but I own it outright. Except for monthlies like utilities, car insurance and such, every dollar coming in stays in my pocket or goes into savings. No house payment, no car payment, no store credit cards. I do have one credit card I utilize to keep my credit rating going... buy my groceries with it and pay it off every month. When I buy my place to retire on, I may not have enough cash to purchase it outright, looks like I'm going to be at about 80% down... so might have a small mortgage of say $400 a month. Now that I've been free for so long, even that small amount niggles a bit LOL.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Prepared One said:


> Sure! I used to be a pro at finding low women in low places. You know the type. Smoking hot body, would curl your toes and blow your mind in bed, then two weeks later she is chasing you down the driveway with a butcher knife. Ahhhhhh, good times. :tango_face_grin:


The beautiful nutjobs are always the most fun... until they aren't LOL.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> Anytime you borrow money, there is going to be someone looking for that money. Sometimes you have that money, and sometimes things go to hell and you don't. There is ALWAYS risk. That risk may or may not be acceptable to a person. I prefer to avoid as much risk as possible.


 Risk is something you manage.
If you can finance at .9% And your cash is a safe investment is making 4% or even much more you are fool to pay cash. credit score does effect much of your life. Insurance rates and other things use it either for you or against you . I owe no one a dime.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Risk is something you manage.
> If you can finance at .9% And your cash is a safe investment is making 4% or even much more you are fool to pay cash. credit score does effect much of your life. Insurance rates and other things use it either for you or against you . I owe no one a dime.


Not arguing, but I will say it is never foolish to pay cash. Congratulations for not owing anyone a dime! It is a good feeling.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> Not arguing, but I will say it is never foolish to pay cash. Congratulations for not owing anyone a dime! It is a good feeling.


 Example 2017 bike I purchased. I had the cash in hand. I always save for my bikes. I made a great deal on price out the door. .99% finance . The cash was sitting in a mutual fund that was doing just fine and a lot better that .99%. it is foolish to take that cash out and pay cash. You lose a considerable amount of money on the deal. That bike was paid off in a year . Paid dam little interest and still have my capital and the interest it earned. looking at a new 2020.
Think outside the box. many way to be creative in managing finances.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Example 2017 bike I purchased. I had the cash in hand. I always save for my bikes. I made a great deal on price out the door. .99% finance . The cash was sitting in a mutual fund that was doing just fine and a lot better that .99%. it is foolish to take that cash out and pay cash. You lose a considerable amount of money on the deal. That bike was paid off in a year . Paid dam little interest and still have my capital and the interest it earned. looking at a new 2020.
> Think outside the box. many way to be creative in managing finances.


I understand that the snake you were petting was a cute little thing. I prefer not to pet snakes. I am totally fine with you petting snakes as long as I am not liable for any of your bills. It is not for lack of imagination that I handle my finances the way I do. While you may still have the amount of money you had in your mutual fund still in your mutual fund, you do not still have your capital, unless you have discovered magic. What you did do is purchase a depreciating asset that you paid interest on while it depreciated. Which, again, does not bother me in the least. Wish I owned a credit company. :tango_face_wink:


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

StratMaster said:


> The beautiful nutjobs are always the most fun... until they aren't LOL.


----------

