If you are FlippingA - Sold Comps in the immediate area that are within 10% of the sq ftg of the property you are analyzing sold within the last 3 months B - Needed Profit in Dollars...not percentage (pay yourself first or why bother)...and don't change the number.C - Cost/expenses associated with buying property  D - Maximum Offer on property (in dollars, not percentages)...and don't fudge the number, or rationalize a different number A - B - C = DIf you are Holdinga - Rental Comps in the immediate area that are within 10% of the sq ftg of the property you are analyzingb - Needed Cash Flow in Dollars...not percentage (pay yourself first or why bother)...and don't change the number.c - Cost/expenses associated with holding property that you have to pay...not the tenantd - Maximum mortgage payment you can paye - Maximum mortgage you can afford on the property (in dollars, not percentages) based on terms you are getting from lender (unterst rate and term length)...and don't fudge the number, or rationalize a different numberf - Down Payment as a percentageg - Down Payment in dollarsh - Maximum offer you can make in order to get the cash flow you needa - b - c = de + g = h

Now, while this is a good mindset to have and it is good for a person's ego and good for those who feed off of positivity only, it's even better for those who feed of off statistical data, rational thinking and common sense - the wolves. 

I am currently trying to use the equity on the 1st home with a credit union bank , I want to do a cash-out refinance of 80k to purchase a 3rd property, but the credit union is saying that my debt to income ration is at 49% and it’s not letting me qualify.

You're rationalizing something (haven't figured out what yet) that makes this a good deal. 

A seemingly huge gross profit/rent-to-price ratio can be reduced significantly by an extremely high expense ration as the result of tenant behavior, vacancy, and completely unexpected "one-off" or "random" events, that somehow happen consistently.

Rationally, yeah that means move your a$$ and get it done, but in this case he went out to the jobsite resentful and spent his time messing with your property.To me, at the point that you had that conversation is the point to cut ties.

So saaay a month or month and change ago I was what I would call rationally pessimistic. 

First, don't let the 1 year goal force you into accepting a bad deal...or rationalizing a bad deal onto a good one.Second, everyone has a different number for CF needed, depending on where they are in the timeline of their plan. 

You're rationalizing a bad deal.

You seem to be pinpointing all the positive points and ignoring the negative, or worse ...rationalizing them.However, if you think this is a good deal, and you're happy with the numbers, no matter how negative they really are, then go for it.I think you've been given a number of very good suggestions on how to make the attempt to get this into a Section 8 scenario, so I won't restate them.