Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Stephen Masek

Stephen Masek has started 25 posts and replied 602 times.

Post: Buying In Las Vegas

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

You also need to consider what kind of tenant each area and house will attract. North Vegas properties will probably require much more maintenance and repair.

Post: Official Phoenix Market BP Investors Meetup

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

We were in Phoenix July 5 to 8. The most important thing we learned is what to avoid. There is a stigma on properties south of I-10 and crime there is way up. We saw two exceptionally nice newer forclosed houses (4/2, fancy moldings, modern layout, etc.) very near nice new shopping and so forth in Leveen. Two property managers told us that it takes very long to rent them in that area, and the rents are quite low. We researched crime data, and see that it is an area to avoid.

It seems that Surprise is a good area.

We saw one house which a flipper is trying to sell for too much in an HOA which prohibits renting for the first two years of ownership, and charges a $200 per month penalty for violations!

Post: Run the Numbers: Two Older vs One Newer

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

The Morgan Stanley article or brochure was prepared almost one year ago, and much has changed since then.

Post: Run the Numbers: Two Older vs One Newer

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

Thanks David, I had not previously seen that brochure.

Post: HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

There is also the matter of religious freedom which is trampled by Obamacare, which forces religious institutions to pay for things which are against their beliefs (e.g. abortion drugs). The lawsuit by the Catholic Church will be a very big deal if Obama wins. Hopefully, it will be moot when Romney wins and Obamacare is repealed.

Post: HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204
Originally posted by J Scott:
Just because one incarnation of subsidized health care results in one set of (unfortunate) circumstances doesn't mean every incarnation of subsidized health care will result in those same circumstances.....
Not just one! They all degenerate to the same stuff, some are just at different stages or levels of degeneration. Open your eyes and travel around to places with it. You won't like what you see.

Post: HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204
Originally posted by J Scott:
Originally posted by Stephen Masek:
If I read the Constitution, it says nothing about on those with birth defects having the sole right to subsidized health care.
Sorry J, I just typed too fast, in the middle of doing many other things. I most certainly did not mean to imply that anyone has a right to subsided healthcare, only that most agree that there is a need to care for such people (no implication of government involvement).

There is no right to healthcare, a good job, a big flatscreen, a fancy car, education, or most other things in the Constitution, just the freedoms to use our God-given abilities and opportunities.

Post: Run the Numbers: Two Older vs One Newer

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204
Originally posted by David Beard:
...selling for 20-30% of 2006 prices....I expect a reversion to the mean....
What is the mean? 2006 / 2007 was an abnormal peak.

Post: HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

J Scott - I'd suggest reading Dr. Walter E. Williams' recent column "Forced Charity Is Legal Plunder." Private charity is to be praised. Government taking from some and giving to others, with plenty or most blead-off to bureaucracy is not.

As for a "right" to health care, there is none. If charities choose to help, that is their choice. Bad actions have to have bad consequences, or society falls apart. If they are lucky, those who do not behave properly will find a relative or charity to help.

Of course, those few born with birth defects are a special case, as they ad their parents (in most cases) did nothing worng.

Post: HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD

Stephen MasekPosted
  • Investor
  • Mission Viejo, CA
  • Posts 627
  • Votes 204

Brian - you really ought to go visit places with the fully socialized medicine you say you want. Go to that cancer ward with the people screaming in pain because they do not have cash for painkillers (I can give you the address). Go see the old people dying for lack of care unless bribes are paid. Go see all people waiting and waiting, unless bribes are paid. Do you really want that? If you have some utopian dreams that it would somehow work out differently here, why? Such schemes, everywhere they have been tried, always have degenerated into rationing, bribery, and neglect of old people.