That's what I'm told however, "affordable" has to be examined through the lens of variables too numerous to list in their entirety.

I live in the 1/1 and rent out the 3/2 for $3300 a month which pays the entirety of the PITI + $100.

I have copy and pasted the entirety of the response. 

Who knows where that cash came from, they have leverage throughout the entirety of the lease when it's paid in full. 

Is there a POV on whether or not you should refi the entirety of your initial investment so that your COC returns skyrocket and your risk is reduced, verses refi just enough that's needed for your next investment and leaving in the rest as equity (assuming your next investment requires less initial investment than the first)?

This leads me to my actual question...If all of the numbers are true AND we assume that the house does not appreciate, then with an $11k initial investment and holding for the entirety of the 30 year mortgage, the property would have cash flowed $180k (based on $500/mo cash flow average) and would hopefully still be worth the $300k, but lets say that I made a bad choice and overtime the market I am in goes down 30% and the house is worth $210k.All in all, my initial $11k investment would now be worth around $400k after the 30 year life of the mortgage (assuming I save cashflow and sell at $210k).

if you are married but all of your investment property is in your name only, and you and your wife own property as tenants by the entireties all of the property held in that fashion is exempt from creditors that only you owe money on.So if your spouse is very afraid of the debt associated with rental investing you can do it only in your name and keep your house and and other fully paid off real estate in tenants by the entireties and if she does not owe on the debt then it is exempt from creditors.

See Garn St Germain"A lender may not exercise its option pursuant to a due-on-sale clause upon--, (1) the creation of a lien or other encumbrance subordinate to the lender's security instrument which does not relate to a transfer of rights of occupancy in the property; (2) the creation of a purchase money security interest for household appliances; (3) a transfer by devise, descent, or operation of law on the death of a joint tenant or tenant by the entirety; (4) the granting of a leasehold interest of three years or less not containing an option to purchase; (5) a transfer to a relative resulting from the death of a borrower; (6) a transfer where the spouse or children of the borrower become an owner of the property; (7) a transfer resulting from a decree of a dissolution of marriage, legal separation agreement, or from an incidental property settlement agreement, by which the spouse of the borrower becomes an owner of the property; (8) a transfer into an inter vivos trust in which the borrower is and remains a beneficiary and which does not relate to a transfer of rights of occupancy in the property; or (9) any other transfer or disposition described in regulations prescribed by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board.

So they basically vacate the property in its entirety and I do a walk through make sure the place is good, and then issue their SD back to them. 

Unfortunately you cannot force the issue of replacing the electrical system in its entirety legally but  you can simply refuse to  buy the house but the seller may decide to find another buyer.