I have three young kids and decided it would be easier to invest in stocks for many reasons (liquidity, diversification, not taking on debt, not managing tenants, etc.)  

Sadly, due to survivorship bias you won't hear about the risks involved because those that have blown up, are no longer around to share their stories of misfortune.If you're bullish on real estate, can negotiate a good deal, and think rents can cover this amount of leverage go for it, with the caveat that if rents decrease you might be forced to liquidate your asset.

Whether you do so on a full TK e or part time basis will be up to you, but don't be "that guy" several years down the road that wishes he would have started sooner (like me).Educate yourself, pick a strategy, and go!  

You can get better or worse returns in a syndication vs. a buy and hold - you just need to evaluate the #'s, the sponsor's track record, and make sure you're comfortable w/ the assumptions of each option.Key differences:1) control: in a syndication, you have little to none, mainly just whatever influence your voting rights provides2) liquidity: in a syndication, it's not easy getting out prior to the entire group selling the property3) time: being a passive in a syndication is about as passive an investment as you can get, whereas buy and hold will involve landlording, repairs, maint,, etc. unless you hire a PM company4) 1031 exchanges: must easier to orchestrate on your own buy and hold property.    

Develop a professional relationship w/ experienced r/e investors and volunteer to work in exchange for education/experience/mentorship (not money). 

As much as I like coming in here and contributing what I can - I only have my alt e-mail listed and no ph#.  

The E- Myth by Micheal Gerber- It has to do with business in general but I found it to be very useful. 

Additionally, I have around 40k liquid, not including retirement 401k.

We have even gone as high as 85% foe very strong borrowers if they have very good liquidity ( lots of cash and/or other liquid assets).I didn't mention the balance sheet much because it isn't heavily relied upon at our bank or other smaller lending institutions in this area because they tend to be over inflated by the borrower.

Many folks believe that because Chicago is much more diverse in its industries, economy and has better job creation strengths, that Chicago will be immune from Detroit's death spiral of (a) borrowing and pension debt, (b) failure to control the costs of government, (c) loss of state revenues, (d) bad public schools and (e) ever increasing tax burden for working, middle class families.My interest in this question stems primarily from the dramatic price declines in Detroit real estate prices before its municipal bankruptcy.