Who wants a + cashflow property?

hi there ghotib,

” might use our properties to rebuild social capital and/or to contribute to other common resources, such as clean air and water. Not just win/win for owner and tenant, but win/win/win for owner, tenant, and the general population. “

Well going in to a town of 3,500 people and spending about 60k there on houses and 20K on materials at the local shops and employing tradesmen to end up with a property that offers ‘more for less’ to a tenant – nicer than similar properties available at the same price – i.e. being competitive – it’s a win win, stimulationg the local economy. All the tradesmen and vendors now with money in their pockets can also spend it. And then there’s more income and more taxes for the gov’t and more money to put into roads and water and and and…

basically I see investors coming in to an area as creating employment. The average wage in that area is 13500 PA, and as i spent more than that there, I reckon I kinda created the equivalent of one job, even though it was spread over various people.

BTW i went back to the area and now there are two trendy cafes not just one. So there’s an effect of people spending money in the area, there’s more demand for nice things for people to spend their money on.

cheers-
Mini

Ghoti wrote:

‘Wrenching this thread back towards property, do you see any way that your residential properties might promote, or at least enable, better nutrition and/or lifestyle?’

Though it’s conbtrolled by developers rather than property buyers, the street layout of subdivisions has a lot to answer for in encouraging sedentary lifestyles.

Developments with cul-de-sacs make walking less practical than suburbs with have grid street layouts. This, plus the closer spacing of facilities and better public transport, are the reasons why walking is much more widespread in inner suburbs than outer suburbs.

But most kids are raised in outer suburbs, and this is where they will pick up sedentary habits due to the necessity to drive everywhere.

This is reinforced in pretty much all aspects of urban design in outer suburbs.

For instance highways that do not have houses or shops fronting onto them reduce ‘informal supervision’ and are percieved as unsafe for pedestrians worried about muggings at night.

Also the tendency for shops to face towards parking lots (rather than the footpath) further discourages walking.

Large roundabouts ensure a constant stream of traffic, rather than bursts of traffic as with traffic lights. Roundabouts hinder pedestrian access and thus the ‘walkability’ of neigbourhoods.

Cul-de-sacs and loop streets, apart from discouraging walking, also make fast, frequent and well-patronised bus routes almost impossible to set up.

The reason for all this urban vandalism is that road engineers, obsessed with the throughput of cars, have controlled the planning process for about the last 40 years. Fortunately this is being countered by community groups and the ‘New Urbanism’ movement in the US, but not yet enough to change the face of many new subdivisions here.

Back to Ghoti’s point as to what we can do. Well we could (as all the books encourage) buy property that’s walking distance to town, shops and/or public transport. Thus at least we can give our tenants opportunties to lead active lives.

One of my more depressing theories is that almost everything we do (no matter how noble) has some unintended (and not necessarily good) side-effect.

If too many investors regard walkability and access as a consideration, then the price gradient between well-located properties and those less located will increase due to greater competition for them. Thus first buyers will be priced out of the best areas (as we’ve seen in the last boom where inner suburbs rose first and quickest).

The well-off will be able to walk to everything, whereas the battlers are forced out to the cul-de-sacs where the hourly bus service finishes at 7pm. Thus they will have to drive everywhere, and spend a huge proportion of their money on cars.

Because of this socially-mandated consumption, there is precious little left over for investment. The gaps between those who can accumulate capital and those who can’t or don’t will increase (note that differences in wealth are starker than differences in income, and (I suspect) differences in passive income are even greater.

About the only solution is if people give up on owning their PPOR. By renting they might be able to afford to live in a better serviced (and walkable) suburb that they can’t afford to buy in. They’d be less sedentary and transport costs could be lower, so it might be possible to invest more (including buying property for others like them to rent). As a tenant they’d also have the glee of contributing to some negative-gearer’s 3% rental yield!

Regards, Peter

Sorry Kay, temporarlly going of topic. [] But just for a minute.

BeerBoy are u taking Dr. Wallachs products. Australian Longevity?

Back on topic again.

This is directed to everyone. Different people have different thoughts and actions. Why is there any need to put someone down. If your thoughts are putting someone else down then we don’t want to see it on here. Keep it to yourself.

Kay I totaly agree with you.

Matt

“If you do what you have always done, you will get what you have always had.”

“Isn’t it time for a change?”

Henry and Matt, thanks for your reasoned replies.

Sis and Bear, disgruntled REAs call due diligence tyre kicking. I am yet to meet anyone who puts an offer in on every property he inspects. If my son was to buy real estate based on advice from a stranger, then i would also encourage them to tyre kick. Obviously, a seller is happiest when he gets his money easiest- with the least questions asked, and the least amount of work to do.

Bear, I certainly asked you a lot of questions via email, but you provided minimal information. (I am happy to copy and paste our email conversations as proof.) You did this to avoid losing your spotter’s fee by giving away too much for free. As I said, you made an emphatic statement that I did not know which properties you were talking about. You were wrong. I wanted to let other’s know that the West Coast of Tasmania is a small place with a handful of properties for sale.

I hope my posts have educated others that with a little knowledge of realestate.com, domain.com, and google, they can do a lot of research themselves without a middle man. I hope my efforts to instruct for free are appreciated as much as your efforts to charge for information freely available on the internet.

I am sure Steve McNight’s Christian morals will swing to favour the free sharing of instruction to favour all. Not that I am against middle men, as long as they are truly adding value.

Let’s just let it rest there.

Bruce
Mooloolaba, Qld