A limit on Real Estate Investment (credit card, mortgages, financing, payment)

[crystalblue]

In light of the current economic crisis, should there be a limit on how many homes a RE investor can purchase at any one time?

Should anything be done to prevent future crisis of this sort from happening again?

[UpperPeninsulaRon]

Originally Posted by crystalblue

In light of the current economic crisis, should there be a limit on how many homes a RE investor can purchase at any one time?

Should anything be done to prevent future crisis of this sort from happening again?

Could you define just what "the current economic crisis" is? If you are referring to the recent news reporting about an increase in some foreclosures, I do not see that this rates as some kind of financial crisis. Simply put, the government pressured lenders to go easier on credit than some peoples ability to accept that responsibility in the name of home ownership. The experiment, predictably, failed.

Should there be a limit on home much property one can own? Of course not, unless the basis of our system, the private ownership of real property, is taken away. That, my friend, would be socialism.

[TimtheGuy]

Originally Posted by crystalblue

In light of the current economic crisis, should there be a limit on how many homes a RE investor can purchase at any one time?

Should anything be done to prevent future crisis of this sort from happening again?

That is a ludicrous idea crystal. Who are you/they to limit someone's purchases/investments. Should we limit how many cars someone buys?

The lenders all ready have limits on how many mortgages they will give to one person. That is not to say the investor can't just find another lender. It does limit a single lender's liability though.

[TimtheGuy]

Originally Posted by crystalblue

In light of the current economic crisis, should there be a limit on how many homes a RE investor can purchase at any one time?

Should anything be done to prevent future crisis of this sort from happening again?

That is the equivalent of the asinine democrat knee-jerk "we need new regualtion", "we need to protect every citizen", "nanny state" over re-action.

[crystalblue]

so, we should allow a small greedy minority ruin the lives of many?

should there be no limits? or do we want complete unrestricted capitalism?


http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/376559.html (broken link)

and it seems like a number of people do think there is a crisis coming.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by crystalblue

In light of the current economic crisis, should there be a limit on how many homes a RE investor can purchase at any one time?

Should anything be done to prevent future crisis of this sort from happening again?

not sure I understand your rationality.. You'll find that true "RE investors" are in no way hurting in todays "crisis".

Its the first time home buyers who didnt understand what they were buying which is causing the "crisis" your speaking of.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by crystalblue

so, we should allow a small greedy minority ruin the lives of many?

should there be no limits? or do we want complete unrestricted capitalism?

http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/376559.html (broken link)

and it seems like a number of people do think there is a crisis coming.

Real estate investors, who providing housing to the poor are greedy?

What part of your news story shows reflect that its the "investors", those small greedy minority ruing lives for the rest?

[StealthRabbit]

maybe folks like Ted Turner who is buying up the American prairie should be in a special "assessment" group so that he doesn't run the other farmers broke due to speculative buying running taxes up. That would be the only restriction I would want to see. Our family has been chased off 3 farms (since 1930's) due to speculative valuations.

With additional controls, taxes WILL go up as infrastructure of gov blossoms. That will eventually kill us all (unless you are on state aid, if not; you will be...). Very sad post...

[sunsprit]

I'm appalled at the "logic" of crystalblue ...

The defaults of a few irresponsible borrowers in no way is connected to those who have chosen to try to use real estate as an investment vehicle.

I'd bet that you'd find most casual real estate investors are middle class people, not the lowest echelon borrowers who are having difficulty living up to their bad choices.

Like many other real estate investors in single family houses, I rent those houses out to people who either don't want to buy (for many reasons) or can't save enough money for a reasonable down payment. By putting my capital at risk, I'm helping others to have decent and affordable housing. I specialize in finding good deals on property which I can then rent out at decent rates which are attractive to others ... which helps keep my places rented with minimal turnover (I've had tenants stay for as long as 12 years!!!). What's wrong with that, crystalb? I'm not using government (read: YOUR MONEY) capital to provide that service, I'm using my own money ... if there's a loss, it's all mine. True, if (and it can be a very big IF) I make some money, it's all mine ... well, that's not true, either ... the gov't takes a share out in taxes from my earnings gain.

IMO, there should not be a limit as to how many houses an individual owns, especially as an investor.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

I'm appalled at the "logic" of crystalblue ...

The defaults of a few irresponsible borrowers in no way is connected to those who have chosen to try to use real estate as an investment vehicle.

I'd bet that you'd find most casual real estate investors are middle class people, not the lowest echelon borrowers who are having difficulty living up to their bad choices.

Like many other real estate investors in single family houses, I rent those houses out to people who either don't want to buy (for many reasons) or can't save enough money for a reasonable down payment. By putting my capital at risk, I'm helping others to have decent and affordable housing. I specialize in finding good deals on property which I can then rent out at decent rates which are attractive to others ... which helps keep my places rented with minimal turnover (I've had tenants stay for as long as 12 years!!!). What's wrong with that, crystalb? I'm not using government (read: YOUR MONEY) capital to provide that service, I'm using my own money ... if there's a loss, it's all mine. True, if (and it can be a very big IF) I make some money, it's all mine ... well, that's not true, either ... the gov't takes a share out in taxes from my earnings gain.

IMO, there should not be a limit as to how many houses an individual owns, especially as an investor.

Perhapse we should stop financing cars because people have them repo'd, or stop issuing credit cards because people dont pay on them. Heck, we should ban all books because we find some of them objectionable, ban sex because some people are not responsible, yeah, enough of this rant..