You have $100,000 in equity in the property costing you $833/month in lost income, you do not want to lose any more.

You would have to do it sub-to.If you could get the sellers to take 2k instead of 5k, you take 2k and arrears of 4k that means the buyer would pay 8k to get into a home and now they have 20k in equity. 

But when we did this in Dallas on a 320 unit, 200 takers paid $25/mo that $5K income/mo or $60K/yr divided by the 6% cap rate (.06) added $1m in equity to the property on something that cost maybe $100K.  

I’ve crunched the numbers and to conservatively reach that I’ve estimated would take 1.5M in equity at least.  

The property currently has about 60k in equity. 

All of the details, including drawings and pro forma, will be provided following initial qualification.Requirements- Commitment of at least $50,000 in equity upfront- Experience as a GC on multi-family projects (including references)- Strong track record of quality, efficiency and safety- Located in Southern CaliforniaPlease PM me to discuss further.Best,Gene

I'd be somewhat more willing to stay in it if the negative cashflow was minimal, but I'd probably lean toward selling it especially with $100k in equity.

In other words, if I have, say, $200k in equity, when I do this deal does my equity position go to $180k, or $0k until the debt is satisfied?

This means that of the $30,000 in equity you're going to get 80 to 90% of that.

However, there are also concerns about the impact of automation on employment and income inequality, which may need to be addressed through policy interventions.Additionally, achieving post-scarcity will require not just technological advancements but also changes in societal values and economic systems.