All Forum Categories
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback
All Forum Posts by: Dan H.
Dan H. has started 29 posts and replied 6075 times.
Post: First Deal in Need of Second Opinion
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
My experience is that more than 90% of new RE investors underestimate expenses. You may be in the less than 10% that does not. This concerns me when you state it is cash neutral because if your underwriting is like most newer RE investors it would mean you are cash negative. What does the 50% rule show the cash flow. At the average rent point of Columbus ($1837), I believe the 50% rule is aggressive and your expenses are likely to exceed 50%.
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/oh/columbus/real-estate
The long term appreciation (this century) is average (3.84%) for the US but good for Ohio. At a high LTV your leverage will be magnified.
If your cash flow really is break even (I have my doubts) then with the magnification resulting from leverage, you could produce a fairly good return (ROI from leveraged appreciation, equity pay down, tax benefits).
Good luck
Post: Advise for managing property of out of state
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Don Aleshire:
This is fair feedback @Dan H. and I appreciate the comparison of Stock Market vs Rental Real Estate. I am going to add a bit more context, please provide any extra thoughts or insights.
I am heavily invested into the stock market at the moment (Index Funds). Enough so that my wife and I no longer need regular income to support my families life style via the 4% rule. This stock income (LTCG) along with the rental properties in Chicago, we have a life of abundance at the moment.
With that being said, the rentals in Chicago do a portion of the heavy lifting by eliminating the housing costs completely while adding $1k extra each month to cover Cap Ex and other expenses. This is a huge value add and allows us flexibility if the market ever dips or issues arise.
I have been assuming that $1k per month in Cap Ex/Expenses, which is roughly 10% of the gross income across all units fully rented out. (PITI $7k Rental Income $11.5k).
With San Diego, we would plan to rent as I just don't see the value in owning a house as a primary residence, there are just too many expenses to justify the cost of home ownership, especially in San Diego. Like you mentioned, the money in the market is effortless. Unless I could find a rental property to house hack (Casita?) or some other form of cash flow investment, I think renting fits our needs.
With all this being said, if I sell the rentals in Chicago, after selling costs + tax, I would be looking at $400k. ($600k Equity - 10% closing costs/Taxes). While the $400k isn't nothing, I view the roughly $3k per month in cash flow as stronger ($4k - $1k expenses).
What might I not be seeing with this math/view I share above? Again, I am open to any and all feedback as I am trying to make the best investment approach. Thanks in advance!
>I have been assuming that $1k per month in Cap Ex/Expenses, which is roughly 10% of the gross income across all units fully rented out. (PITI $7k Rental Income $11.5k).
This is not nearly enough for sustained maintenance/cap ex on 6 units. Where did your 10% number come from? Have you done any math to try to calculate the expected maintenance/cap ex? I have confidence you have not as your maintenance/cap ex estimate would be significantly higher if you have actually calculated a value.
>While the $400k isn't nothing, I view the roughly $3k per month in cash flow as stronger ($4k - $1k expenses).
You do not have $4k/month sustained cash flow. As indicated your maintenance/cap ex is too low. Then vacancy, PM (unless your time has zero value), uncollected rent, misc. I have confidence that my $1.5K/month is more accurate.
I looked up the long term appreciation for Chicago and it is not good (3.35%/year for this century). Your leverage is not great enough to provide huge magnification of the appreciation.
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/il/chicago/real-estate
Your leverage is 40% LTV. The long term (since 2000) appreciation for chicago is 3.35%/year. 3.35 * (10/6) = 5.58% return from appreciation.
Total return: 5.58% (appreeciation including the leerage) + 2% (cash flow)= 8.58% + equity pay down + tax benefits.
I fear your total return does not justify the effort and risk of residential RE.
San Diego is a good market for long holds. Retail purchases have large negative initial cash flow. I would suggest buying without value add only if you were going to keep the property at least 10 years.
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/san-diego/real-estate
I think your plan to rent in San Diego is likely the correct choice especially as you get to know the area. If you believe you are going to stay over 10 years, you could benefit from a purchase after you identify the area that you desire to live.
Good luck
Post: Advise for managing property of out of state
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
My view is your cash flow is not good for the investment amount. $4k before allocating for maintenance/cap ex, PM (even if self manage include the cost is you believe your time has any value), vacancy, uncollected rent, misc.
on 6 units, the on-going maintenance/cap ex will cut the $4k in half. Let’s say your on-going cash flow with realistic expense allocation is $1.5k/month. $18k/year on $900k equity position is 2% return from the cash flow. You will have long term appreciation, equity pay down, and tax advantages to help with the return.
Compare to S&P historical return of 10%. S&P is passive. Residential RE is not passive.
RE investing return to me must far exceed S&P to warrant the effort and various risk items.
The question is are you making enough from the other sources of return other than cash flow to justify the effort and risk?
by the way welcome to San Diego. You likely know this, but the RE prices are crazy high unless you go east. Easy climate is not the same as more coastal San Diego.
Good luck
Post: How much is enough?
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Steve Smith:
Dan,
Nothing wrong with giving dollars away. I've done it at times, sometimes 6 figures, but always do it so that there's no tax burden on my recipient.
Also, I like mentoring a few people interested at times, but find it very frustrating. I find that less than 1 in 10 really do much about it, but it's very rewarding when one hits that million dollar mark.
I only give to charities that really have value, and are not skimming most of the money for admin.
Time is still the most valuable thing most of us have, so spend it wisely.
I have a much better mentor succuss than you seem to be experiencing. My first one for a while was indicating he was going to catch me in RE value and his projectory was that he would, but his last transaction was not a hold. The transaction netted near $1m but he had a 50% partner (not me, his sister) so he netted half (land transaction on large scale ADU development -
https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/working-for-you/new-...). He is by far my most successful protege, but my second most successful is doing quite well and then I have a few who are making process to doing well. I only have one that seemed to fail to launch.
What I do get more is I offer to run a newbie through a transaction and/or show them the work in progress and I get either no show or barely show. My last transaction is up ~$1M above costs. In early Dec I offered to a few (4 or 5) newbies to provide financials and show them the last of the work. The financials would show what is possible. I provided them a day to be there (any time that day before 4 PM). Only one sort of showed up. She came after 4 but I was there until 6:30. if she had contacted me, I would have shown her what was planned to finish and discussed the financials. If someone has a deal that they are up over $1m (including the small cash flow) and I was starting out, I would be all over the financials and the plan. I would try to make a lasting impression so that I get an opportunity to see the next "deal". Nope! This was not the first time. When I came back from BPCon 2024 I was feeling a little generous. I offered to show multiple people the numbers on my current RE holdings and to discuss what had been done. At that time I had just finished an effort and was about to start a unit rehab and had the one from early dec in the pipeline. I had a fair amount of people (between 5 and 10) express some interest. They were told when to contact me, NOTHING. I think some people want it to just happen through osmosis or something.
>Time is still the most valuable thing most of us have, so spend it wisely.
No truer statement. It hits home especially today as I am putting down a family dog that we have had 14.5 years. HIs time is up and he has given up (stopped eating and moving). We all have limited time on this earth, with loved ones, to experience all the world's wonders, to help others, to try to leave the world better, etc.
Best wishes
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
We can play the word game all day long. He won the popular vote and the electoral vote. He won a lot of the union vote as well as double on voters from non traditional bases. This is what I was talking about in another post. People don’t accept reality. It was a landslide he swept the blue wall picked up Georgia and North Carolina. To me that classifies as a majority. There was a clear mandate by the people of the united states(it doesn’t matter how I feel about it) everyone knew what he was running on. And yet he picked up roughly 2 million more votes than 2020 and Dems lost roughly 7 million. That’s a 9 million vote swing. To me that is people accepting his position. We can split hairs all we want and not like the outcome but he fact remains the house was held red the senate flipped red and the presidency is red. That signals that people want change(whether I agree or not) the fantasy world of not acknowledging people’s wants and desires not being in touch and having wordplay is exactly why the red wave happened.im not an eagles fan but its clear to me they dominated the Super Bowl (whether I like it or not)
>To me that classifies as a majority.
Now you are redefining majority. Seriously? Winning a majority of the vote means he got over 50% of the vote. He did not unless you change the definition of majority.
He won the popular vote by a smaller margin than any democratic victor going back to JFK. This is the vote you indicated overwhelmingly voted for trump. under that definition every democratic winner (and possibly some democratic losers) since JFK where more overwhelming voted for.
Definitions matter. Making up definitions to support the narrative you desire is misleading. Incorrect usage of majority added to questionable usage of overwhelmingly to advance a narrative is deceitful.
The US is getting more divided. false narrative does not help. My view is in general it has been going this way for decades.
Out
Since this seems to be in hot contention as to "majority"....
So "majority" literally means the greater number, right.
Here is the #'s per CNN:
Did D.J.T. not get the "majority" of electoral AND popular vote?
By the very definition of "majority"?
Accusing people of "false narratives" for statements of majority, accusing them of changing the definition of majority..... Well there ya go Dan.
Now what?
Let me guess, it's not a big enough majority to please your speech policing for what Jeremiah had said?
Ugh.... Just get over it, seriously, get-over-it. Come down off the cross, build a bridge with the wood and get over it.
I am big enough to admit that I did not believe any legit source would have that definition
When it comes to elections, majority typically means the meridian Webster’s first definition as more than half. Winning less than 50% but still winning is typically referred to as winning the popular vote. When a candidate needs a majority of the vote to win election it means that winning the popular vote is not sufficient and if the candidate with the most votes gets less than 50% of the vote, an additional election is required.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/majority#:~:text=...
Out
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Eric Bilderback:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
We can play the word game all day long. He won the popular vote and the electoral vote. He won a lot of the union vote as well as double on voters from non traditional bases. This is what I was talking about in another post. People don’t accept reality. It was a landslide he swept the blue wall picked up Georgia and North Carolina. To me that classifies as a majority. There was a clear mandate by the people of the united states(it doesn’t matter how I feel about it) everyone knew what he was running on. And yet he picked up roughly 2 million more votes than 2020 and Dems lost roughly 7 million. That’s a 9 million vote swing. To me that is people accepting his position. We can split hairs all we want and not like the outcome but he fact remains the house was held red the senate flipped red and the presidency is red. That signals that people want change(whether I agree or not) the fantasy world of not acknowledging people’s wants and desires not being in touch and having wordplay is exactly why the red wave happened.im not an eagles fan but its clear to me they dominated the Super Bowl (whether I like it or not)
>To me that classifies as a majority.
Now you are redefining majority. Seriously? Winning a majority of the vote means he got over 50% of the vote. He did not unless you change the definition of majority.
He won the popular vote by a smaller margin than any democratic victor going back to JFK. This is the vote you indicated overwhelmingly voted for trump. under that definition every democratic winner (and possibly some democratic losers) since JFK where more overwhelming voted for.
Definitions matter. Making up definitions to support the narrative you desire is misleading. Incorrect usage of majority added to questionable usage of overwhelmingly to advance a narrative is deceitful.
The US is getting more divided. false narrative does not help. My view is in general it has been going this way for decades.
Out
Fair enough. We can play word games all day. We can say Biden and Obama won overwhelmingly. That is fine. This is isn’t about about picking sides. Its about people either voted for him based on his clearly laid out agenda, Or they didn’t vote against it. Regardless all the chambers are Red. Call it what you will.what I know is there was a 9 million vote swing. My opinion or thoughts on the matter don’t change who in office.the people have spoken and have said they want what he campaigned on.Be it a blow out or one vote win. In the end it doesn’t matter the size of the win. A win is a win. I hope he does well. I hope the next president does well. I hope you do well.
What’s my narrative? I don’t have one I stated that republicans swept the elections they have an all red house. To me that is kinda of a blowout. I feel like the country “ overwhelmingly “ felt this way since it was a sweep in popular and electoral house and senate as well as I don’t think democrats did better in any county than they did last time. These are truths. Sorry we don’t see eye to eye on terms. Sheesh is this how bill mauer feels
This view I more understand. The legislature, executive, and judicial are all red currently. But the margins on both legislative branches are very small. The Executive branch did not get the majority of the vote. If left leaning justices were more aware of their health and the nature of the legislative branch, the judicial could have a different makeup.
I also want to point out that my view of overwhelming does not apply to any term since Reagan. It is rare that a party has control of all 3 branches, even if the margin is razor thin. It is the reality.This does not change that I wish the country was less divided. I think the fact that all 3 branches are currently right leaning does not imply that the country is not very divided.
I hear JD and Trump state falsehoods like Trump won the majority of the vote or there is a clear mandate. The reality is his margin of victory on the popular vote is less than every democratic winner going back to JFK. they state this falsehood to give the false impression that the majority of voters voted for his actions (which is not the case).
I agree some things needed addressing but believe that many of Trumps actions are against the law. The deficit needs addressing, but congress should have control of the purse. Congress is abdicating their power because they do not have the votes to do the things that trump is doing by executive order that are not in his power to lawfully do. It is an interesting but dangerous precedent.
I view this as potentially very dangerous. I think we all hope this works out.
Regardless, I think we are in for a bumpy ride. fortunately, I believe that I would do great financially regardless of who won the presidential election. If taxes go down for higher tax basis, I will move more taxable money to tax free options allowing for greater wealth preservation.
Good luck
I could be wrong but I think he is gonna be able to push through what he was voted in to do. He has both senate and house. This gonna help him push his agenda. We can not like the man in office all we want, but once the charade is over he is gonna be able to do what his constituents voted him in n to do.word it how you may but more people were in favor of his policies than were opposed. Regardless how it’s spun. People are going to expect a return in thier investment. He said such and such. Now the greater number of people who voted for him expect him to follow through.We may not like the political arena but the other side is not always wrong and my side is not always correct. Take the propaganda out of each party and look at actual content I think we would be less “devisive”. Hope you do well in the next four years and the four after that
I do not think he will need to push much through the legislative branch and that if he tried he would not succeed. What appears to be happening is he is making executive orders that should fall under congressional purvey. The legislature is abdicating their role in the process because they recognize it would not pass the legislation (at least not without revoking the filibuster).
This is the dangerous precedent. Each branch of government has their role as a means to constrain the other branches. If a branch abdicates its responsibility, another branch can assume powers that are not theirs.
The legislative branch allowing the executive branch to assume power that does not belong with the executive branch is a means to get around the difficulties or getting anything passed by the legislature.
I offer as evidence that the legislation could not pass these changes the question "what has this legislation passed of any significance?" Anything?
I think politics will forever be changed, and not for the better.
Good luck
Who got over a million Ukrainians killed while their buddies in the defense industry made billions? Who pretended COVID came from a bat and scrubbed the internet when they pointed out that you still get COVID after taking the vaxes? Who pretended to believe that Biden's pervert, crackhead kid's laptop which had proof financial crimes committed by his low life Dad was Russian disinformation and scrubbed and then censored the internet to ensure that his Biden was elected Commander and Chief? I agree that politics has changed but Trump is not the change he is the response to average Americans being sold out.
Wow you certainly believe some interesting conspiracies. suspect it makes your life interesting.
Out
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
Dan.... 73% approval ratings for POTUS Trump as of now...... And as they uncover and disclose more and more of EXACTLY what they campaigned on and said was going on AND what they'd do about it, it's GROWING......
If that doesn't tell you something, nothing will......
Your response has no relation to the vote. The comment "They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it." would at a minimum indicate he received a majority of votes. He did not. I do not consider this arguable unless you believe overwhelming does not, at a minimum, imply a majority. My own definition of overwhelming is closer to a super majority, but I would hope everyone considers overwhelming to at least imply a majority.
Trump did not get a majority of vote. He won the popular vote by 1.5% or 1/3 of what Biden won the popular vote by (So Biden was at 3X more "overwhelming" vote). I would not have referred to Biden victory as "voted overwhelming". The last presidential election that I would classify as was voted overwhelming in one direction was Reagan 2nd term. Obama won by over 7% in his first term. Some may consider this over whelming, but it does not meet my criteria.
I think most people would agree that voting overwhelming implies at a least a majority of the vote. I hope we can agree on at least this much.
The 51st State in the Union..... DENIAL....
My Definition of overwhelming vote being at least a majority and you think I am the one in denial?
I am not sure what you think is denial. Biden won popular vote by 3X trump vote margin (1.5% versus 4.5%) is fact you can look up on any reputable site. is that the denial?
If Trump was voted overwhelmingly then biden was voted in 3X some low threshold of overwhelming. In addition, biden won a majority of the vote so using the minimal definition of "voted Overwhelmingly" of being a majority (which is not my definition), biden was "voted overwhelmingly" into office.
I do agree that my definition of overwhelming to be a super majority is somewhat arbitrary, but I believe virtually everyone (except possible James Hamling) believes it has to be at least a majority to be overwhelming.
Whatever ...
Out (I could add disparaging remark but will not to try to keep BP civil beause I enjoy the forums)
All the arguing.... All the spin.... All the "but... but... but..."'s do absolutely nothing to change 4 very simple fact's which speak VOLUMES of national populace sentiment:
- POTUS is D.J. Trump
- Senate is R majority
- House is R majority
- 73%+ APPROVAL rating.
This sure as heck looks to me as about clear a "majority" as one can expect. And with that a mandate from the citizenship of what they want.
I am sorry if your in the 27% and really wishing the tables were turned. There not.
Again, as you often do, you are changing the discussion to something it was not. The post implied that Trump had received a majority of the vote. he did not. The person who posted that has basically stated that his wording was not correct and explained what he meant. yet here you are again, for at least the 2nd time on my posts, changing the narrative. I have to believe this is intentionally trying to be deceiving. I have seen it before in your posts and the selective editing of the quoted posts. I personally believe that editing quoted posts to change the narrative should be grounds for BP suspension, but I do not make the rules.
I am done with dealing with you intentionally misleading narrative.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
We can play the word game all day long. He won the popular vote and the electoral vote. He won a lot of the union vote as well as double on voters from non traditional bases. This is what I was talking about in another post. People don’t accept reality. It was a landslide he swept the blue wall picked up Georgia and North Carolina. To me that classifies as a majority. There was a clear mandate by the people of the united states(it doesn’t matter how I feel about it) everyone knew what he was running on. And yet he picked up roughly 2 million more votes than 2020 and Dems lost roughly 7 million. That’s a 9 million vote swing. To me that is people accepting his position. We can split hairs all we want and not like the outcome but he fact remains the house was held red the senate flipped red and the presidency is red. That signals that people want change(whether I agree or not) the fantasy world of not acknowledging people’s wants and desires not being in touch and having wordplay is exactly why the red wave happened.im not an eagles fan but its clear to me they dominated the Super Bowl (whether I like it or not)
>To me that classifies as a majority.
Now you are redefining majority. Seriously? Winning a majority of the vote means he got over 50% of the vote. He did not unless you change the definition of majority.
He won the popular vote by a smaller margin than any democratic victor going back to JFK. This is the vote you indicated overwhelmingly voted for trump. under that definition every democratic winner (and possibly some democratic losers) since JFK where more overwhelming voted for.
Definitions matter. Making up definitions to support the narrative you desire is misleading. Incorrect usage of majority added to questionable usage of overwhelmingly to advance a narrative is deceitful.
The US is getting more divided. false narrative does not help. My view is in general it has been going this way for decades.
Out
Fair enough. We can play word games all day. We can say Biden and Obama won overwhelmingly. That is fine. This is isn’t about about picking sides. Its about people either voted for him based on his clearly laid out agenda, Or they didn’t vote against it. Regardless all the chambers are Red. Call it what you will.what I know is there was a 9 million vote swing. My opinion or thoughts on the matter don’t change who in office.the people have spoken and have said they want what he campaigned on.Be it a blow out or one vote win. In the end it doesn’t matter the size of the win. A win is a win. I hope he does well. I hope the next president does well. I hope you do well.
What’s my narrative? I don’t have one I stated that republicans swept the elections they have an all red house. To me that is kinda of a blowout. I feel like the country “ overwhelmingly “ felt this way since it was a sweep in popular and electoral house and senate as well as I don’t think democrats did better in any county than they did last time. These are truths. Sorry we don’t see eye to eye on terms. Sheesh is this how bill mauer feels
This view I more understand. The legislature, executive, and judicial are all red currently. But the margins on both legislative branches are very small. The Executive branch did not get the majority of the vote. If left leaning justices were more aware of their health and the nature of the legislative branch, the judicial could have a different makeup.
I also want to point out that my view of overwhelming does not apply to any term since Reagan. It is rare that a party has control of all 3 branches, even if the margin is razor thin. It is the reality.This does not change that I wish the country was less divided. I think the fact that all 3 branches are currently right leaning does not imply that the country is not very divided.
I hear JD and Trump state falsehoods like Trump won the majority of the vote or there is a clear mandate. The reality is his margin of victory on the popular vote is less than every democratic winner going back to JFK. they state this falsehood to give the false impression that the majority of voters voted for his actions (which is not the case).
I agree some things needed addressing but believe that many of Trumps actions are against the law. The deficit needs addressing, but congress should have control of the purse. Congress is abdicating their power because they do not have the votes to do the things that trump is doing by executive order that are not in his power to lawfully do. It is an interesting but dangerous precedent.
I view this as potentially very dangerous. I think we all hope this works out.
Regardless, I think we are in for a bumpy ride. fortunately, I believe that I would do great financially regardless of who won the presidential election. If taxes go down for higher tax basis, I will move more taxable money to tax free options allowing for greater wealth preservation.
Good luck
I could be wrong but I think he is gonna be able to push through what he was voted in to do. He has both senate and house. This gonna help him push his agenda. We can not like the man in office all we want, but once the charade is over he is gonna be able to do what his constituents voted him in n to do.word it how you may but more people were in favor of his policies than were opposed. Regardless how it’s spun. People are going to expect a return in thier investment. He said such and such. Now the greater number of people who voted for him expect him to follow through.We may not like the political arena but the other side is not always wrong and my side is not always correct. Take the propaganda out of each party and look at actual content I think we would be less “devisive”. Hope you do well in the next four years and the four after that
I do not think he will need to push much through the legislative branch and that if he tried he would not succeed. What appears to be happening is he is making executive orders that should fall under congressional purvey. The legislature is abdicating their role in the process because they recognize it would not pass the legislation (at least not without revoking the filibuster).
This is the dangerous precedent. Each branch of government has their role as a means to constrain the other branches. If a branch abdicates its responsibility, another branch can assume powers that are not theirs.
The legislative branch allowing the executive branch to assume power that does not belong with the executive branch is a means to get around the difficulties or getting anything passed by the legislature.
I offer as evidence that the legislation could not pass these changes the question "what has this legislation passed of any significance?" Anything?
I think politics will forever be changed, and not for the better.
Good luck
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
We can play the word game all day long. He won the popular vote and the electoral vote. He won a lot of the union vote as well as double on voters from non traditional bases. This is what I was talking about in another post. People don’t accept reality. It was a landslide he swept the blue wall picked up Georgia and North Carolina. To me that classifies as a majority. There was a clear mandate by the people of the united states(it doesn’t matter how I feel about it) everyone knew what he was running on. And yet he picked up roughly 2 million more votes than 2020 and Dems lost roughly 7 million. That’s a 9 million vote swing. To me that is people accepting his position. We can split hairs all we want and not like the outcome but he fact remains the house was held red the senate flipped red and the presidency is red. That signals that people want change(whether I agree or not) the fantasy world of not acknowledging people’s wants and desires not being in touch and having wordplay is exactly why the red wave happened.im not an eagles fan but its clear to me they dominated the Super Bowl (whether I like it or not)
>To me that classifies as a majority.
Now you are redefining majority. Seriously? Winning a majority of the vote means he got over 50% of the vote. He did not unless you change the definition of majority.
He won the popular vote by a smaller margin than any democratic victor going back to JFK. This is the vote you indicated overwhelmingly voted for trump. under that definition every democratic winner (and possibly some democratic losers) since JFK where more overwhelming voted for.
Definitions matter. Making up definitions to support the narrative you desire is misleading. Incorrect usage of majority added to questionable usage of overwhelmingly to advance a narrative is deceitful.
The US is getting more divided. false narrative does not help. My view is in general it has been going this way for decades.
Out
Fair enough. We can play word games all day. We can say Biden and Obama won overwhelmingly. That is fine. This is isn’t about about picking sides. Its about people either voted for him based on his clearly laid out agenda, Or they didn’t vote against it. Regardless all the chambers are Red. Call it what you will.what I know is there was a 9 million vote swing. My opinion or thoughts on the matter don’t change who in office.the people have spoken and have said they want what he campaigned on.Be it a blow out or one vote win. In the end it doesn’t matter the size of the win. A win is a win. I hope he does well. I hope the next president does well. I hope you do well.
What’s my narrative? I don’t have one I stated that republicans swept the elections they have an all red house. To me that is kinda of a blowout. I feel like the country “ overwhelmingly “ felt this way since it was a sweep in popular and electoral house and senate as well as I don’t think democrats did better in any county than they did last time. These are truths. Sorry we don’t see eye to eye on terms. Sheesh is this how bill mauer feels
This view I more understand. The legislature, executive, and judicial are all red currently. But the margins on both legislative branches are very small. The Executive branch did not get the majority of the vote. If left leaning justices were more aware of their health and the nature of the legislative branch, the judicial could have a different makeup.
I also want to point out that my view of overwhelming does not apply to any term since Reagan. It is rare that a party has control of all 3 branches, even if the margin is razor thin. It is the reality.This does not change that I wish the country was less divided. I think the fact that all 3 branches are currently right leaning does not imply that the country is not very divided.
I hear JD and Trump state falsehoods like Trump won the majority of the vote or there is a clear mandate. The reality is his margin of victory on the popular vote is less than every democratic winner going back to JFK. they state this falsehood to give the false impression that the majority of voters voted for his actions (which is not the case).
I agree some things needed addressing but believe that many of Trumps actions are against the law. The deficit needs addressing, but congress should have control of the purse. Congress is abdicating their power because they do not have the votes to do the things that trump is doing by executive order that are not in his power to lawfully do. It is an interesting but dangerous precedent.
I view this as potentially very dangerous. I think we all hope this works out.
Regardless, I think we are in for a bumpy ride. fortunately, I believe that I would do great financially regardless of who won the presidential election. If taxes go down for higher tax basis, I will move more taxable money to tax free options allowing for greater wealth preservation.
Good luck
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
#2 Managing Your Property ContributorPosted - Investor
- Poway, CA
- Posts 6,193
- Votes 7,180
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jeremiah Dunakin:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Here's my take, I believe you are missing some key points (or assuming incorrectly :-)
Put upward pressure on interest rates: Trump's demand that the Fed lower rates will have absolutely no effect.
I disagree. Presidents can, will and do put pressure on the Fed chair. They hire them and can fire them, it's not realistic to think there is no pressure on them. I say Trump puts his size 11s up Powells butt by this summer.
However, the implementation of tariffs, or just the threat of tariffs, is likely to influence rates, by impacting inflation numbers, and this influence may come quickly if prices for many common goods and services and raw materials rise
You are assuming that the typical view of Tariffs that we hear from the Dems and the Media are the way they actually work. If you listen to other economists, there are different views on this. And once the 'Reciprocal Tariffs' go into effeect, that's a whole new game. This whole Tariff thing should be short-lived anyway, I see little effect on the economy overall...
I personally believe it is unlikely that Trump actually deports millions of illegal immigrants who have settled in the United States. This, to me, seems impractical, and a PR nightmare.
I think Mr Trump will indeed deport 'a bunch', probably many millions by the time we are done, but certainly I would see the number in excess of a million, easy. He doesn't care about the PR either, the most recent poll saw 70% approval IIRC. The immigration was a huge reason he was elected.
Just my $.02.......
This is where so many people on the left miss the boat. The negative PR he's getting for the deportations is only from the left. As Bruce said, his stance on deportations is a major reason why he was elected. Whether you are pro or anti deportation is one thing, but it's wild to me how many on the left fail to read the room. America has spoken and the left's PR stance on open boarders and immigration is no longer something the majority of Americans agree with. What MSNBC says about the deportations does not matter to the majority of Americans as they are in favor of them.
Agreed, the American people voted for what’s going on. They voted and they voted overwhelmingly to do it. Like the man and his policies or not. The fact remains that his approval numbers are as high as they ever were. He is doing what he voted in to do. It’s amazing (I said this durning the last administration as well ) that people just don’t look at reality. They want to hate (sadly that’s where we are pure unbridled hatered) a party or group of people. Just look at facts. We see policy from both sides. Does it work? Yes or No. doesn’t matter who signs the bill. Does it work
Overwhelmingly to me would imply at least a majority. I do not know your definition of overwhelmingly, but they did not vote overwhelmingly for trump even using my fairly low threshold of having the majority of voters vote for him.
There is this false narrative that there is a clear mandate by the people. Reality is trump did not get the majority of the vote and the senate and house majorities are very thin.
The country and the populace are very divided and have been this way for a while. It is not good. I wish both parties had nominated more moderate candidates, but I could also wish to win the lottery and it has zero impact.
@sctot trench I disagree about your direction on prices as labor used for housing will increase. Material cost is likely to increase. This will slow new housing and make it more expensive. Supply in desirable areas is already less than demand. Any deportations will not overcome this imbalance. Land is finite in many of these desirable areas. So providing housing in these areas is full of challenges.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride ..
We can play the word game all day long. He won the popular vote and the electoral vote. He won a lot of the union vote as well as double on voters from non traditional bases. This is what I was talking about in another post. People don’t accept reality. It was a landslide he swept the blue wall picked up Georgia and North Carolina. To me that classifies as a majority. There was a clear mandate by the people of the united states(it doesn’t matter how I feel about it) everyone knew what he was running on. And yet he picked up roughly 2 million more votes than 2020 and Dems lost roughly 7 million. That’s a 9 million vote swing. To me that is people accepting his position. We can split hairs all we want and not like the outcome but he fact remains the house was held red the senate flipped red and the presidency is red. That signals that people want change(whether I agree or not) the fantasy world of not acknowledging people’s wants and desires not being in touch and having wordplay is exactly why the red wave happened.im not an eagles fan but its clear to me they dominated the Super Bowl (whether I like it or not)
>To me that classifies as a majority.
Now you are redefining majority. Seriously? Winning a majority of the vote means he got over 50% of the vote. He did not unless you change the definition of majority.
He won the popular vote by a smaller margin than any democratic victor going back to JFK. This is the vote you indicated overwhelmingly voted for trump. under that definition every democratic winner (and possibly some democratic losers) since JFK where more overwhelming voted for.
Definitions matter. Making up definitions to support the narrative you desire is misleading. Incorrect usage of majority added to questionable usage of overwhelmingly to advance a narrative is deceitful.
The US is getting more divided. false narrative does not help. My view is in general it has been going this way for decades.
Out