My interest is broad and I could really go in any direction as far as "choosing a niche" goes. 

I'm looking to begin real estate investing, most likely single family or 2-4 unit multi-family.I'd love to tap into the brainpower of the successful and experienced investors within the BP community, with a broad, open-ended question: If you had $50,000 to invest in real estate in 2017, what would you do?

Those houses might sell for 150-200k.Then on the opposite spectrum you might have a $5,000 house that needs $100,000 worth of work to get it livable but at the end, will only be worth $60,000 due to the location.Someone local will know that. 

These follow a spectrum of more revenue/more work on the STR side down to less revenue/less work for a long-term rental.In the end, real estate is a long-term play.

I'm asking this in broad economic terms.If the dollar becomes worthless due to "unsustainability of our fiat system" and we enter into a hyperinflationary period, that would mean that physical assets real estate (and many stocks) would be among the only things that retains value.If we have a real estate bust, then the dollar becomes more valuable in that the purchasing power of cash goes up.Basically, these doomsayers always have some story to support things going to crap. 

No issues.So I don't mean to bust your chops, but saying they don't pay is too broad.

They both have the standard 1MM/5K liability coverages, lost rents, and broad perils.  

Is it too broad a question to be answered?

Your question is very broad but some things to consider are occupancy, type of utilities, who pays the utilities (park/tenant), demographics of the location, improvements needed, market lot rents, how many homes are park owned vs tenant owned, etc. 

I think renter nation is broad, I'm looking at the 25-54 age group.