All Forum Posts by: Norberto Villanueva

There but for grace go I, bro

There I was thinking some people actually experience a personal or financial setback that legitimately prevents them from paying what are often, but not always, the Section 8 slumlords that targeted them disguised as decent landlords. Can you imagine the oblivion?

Purchase the equitable interest in this move-in ready single family home located near everything Rocky Ford, CO. Currently rented to a great,
long-term turned month-to-month tenant, this 1+ bed 1 bath home with a small detached garage has been well taken care of, perfect for the savvy investor. We are crypto friendly!

With newer mechanicals, electricals, and roof that appear to be in great shape, a low level rehab replacing older but usable carpet, cabinets, and vanities won't hurt a resale, but not necessary to rent.
,
Projected to a 6% cap rate and 1% rent to price ratio, we're showing a 6.8% cap rate and 7.6% return on equity with a $34k Capex. IRR is coming at 12%, 10.2 for GRM with financing.

Too bad you're not in Colorado! Wishing you continued success.

Child molestation aside, of course.

Incidentally, you never addressed the issue with your support for housing discriminators. Is that not a thing for OH real estate brokers? Wait, please don't answer that.

That also aside, all your sensationalist ire with who you broadly label as deadbeat tenants obscures the fact, not only is it a highly reliable income source for something like 2 million families nationwide, which includes seniors and the disabled but, investors too! https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/homeowners-insurance/sect...

Looking at the Cleveland market where the median price is $109k and HUD will pay up to $1,527 for a four bedroom, that's a 1.4% rent to sales price ratio which, I'm sure you know, or should know, is nothing to shake a stick or sneeze at so tell me, what's up with that, bro?

Able to acknowledge there but for grace go I, I see you misspelled conscious, bro.

But, to answer your question, even convicted criminals need shelter. Sometimes, not always, that means prison. But it shouldn't have to be under the bridge once their sentence is served. Let me guess. That's so Woke.

The answer to, "Who's deflecting" lies in whose civil rights were violated by said organization, guy. We know they qualified for Section 8 and likely below median income if not at, or below poverty level, and thereby at risk of homelessness but, were they a child molester? And if yes, is that why they were denied shelter?

Another word for human conscience, you lost me at Woke, which is why #12 should have an exception for 99% of the anti-woke, who we know, or should know, need it (social welfare) most. Prove me wrong.