Florida Shooters Network

gforester wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:53 pm

zeebaron wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 3:55 pm

tector wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 11:32 am If there are mass evictions, where will the mass of new tenants come from to replace the evicted masses?

Gonna have to cut rates back to what they were 20 years ago. No more of this $1k for 1 bedroom 1 bath bullshit in the suburbs.

If you were to add up the costs for insurance, taxes, solid waste disposal fees, maintenance and unit clean up costs when a tenant moves out, you would know why rents are so high.

Landlords should lobby for that in the bailout package then.

Oh yes, that super well-funded Lobby of independent landlords with 1 to 5 extra properties that collect rent. They're always rolling in the dough so they bankroll all the politicians. You'll have a few $5,000 a plate dinner buy a few Democrats, and get big money in the next bill.

tector wrote:If there are mass evictions, where will the mass of new tenants come from to replace the evicted masses?

There may be some driven to the rental market from home foreclosures. Like Zee said, though, rental prices may be driven lower, but only initially. As the pool of renters grows the available properties will decrease and the rents will begin to increase again.
It happened in 2008 and the years following, but will be much worse this time due to the breadth of the government shutdowns. We are about to see a flood of home foreclosures. Like gforester said about homeownership costs, that will add millions to the new renters pool looking for relatively cheaper housing costs.
R/Griff

mohshard wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 8:54 pm Oh yes, that super well-funded Lobby of independent landlords with 1 to 5 extra properties that collect rent. They're always rolling in the dough so they bankroll all the politicians. You'll have a few $5,000 a plate dinner buy a few Democrats, and get big money in the next bill.

I haven't seen anyone complain louder during this than landlords who are a tiny bit over-leveraged, yet half of small businesses are going away permanently by the same government decrees.

lilwoody wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:27 pm

Flame Red wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am They hope the MOB comes to burn down the block and insurance pays off. I suggest putting up several BLM signs as that seem to attract them for burning. Insurance pays off for Rioting/Looting.

But when the Civil War is declared, no insurance anymore. So you best hurry!

This is the main reason Trump has not instuted The Insurection Act. As soon as he is forced into doing it ALL insurance companies are off the hook for the losses to these Maoists, anachronistic, street criminals and common scum.
What should be done is go after the deepest pockets in this destruction and there is president to do it. Just as the Klan was broken by civil suits the exact same can be done to BLM.

Insurance companies for years have already put wavers on civil unrest and terrorism. I bet a lot of folks would be surprised if they read their insurance policy.

Chigger wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:25 pm

lilwoody wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:27 pm

Flame Red wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am They hope the MOB comes to burn down the block and insurance pays off. I suggest putting up several BLM signs as that seem to attract them for burning. Insurance pays off for Rioting/Looting.

But when the Civil War is declared, no insurance anymore. So you best hurry!

This is the main reason Trump has not instuted The Insurection Act. As soon as he is forced into doing it ALL insurance companies are off the hook for the losses to these Maoists, anachronistic, street criminals and common scum.
What should be done is go after the deepest pockets in this destruction and there is president to do it. Just as the Klan was broken by civil suits the exact same can be done to BLM.

Insurance companies for years have already put wavers on civil unrest and terrorism. I bet a lot of folks would be surprised if they read their insurance policy.

Ah, but the communist Mayors and DA's maintain these are peaceful protests. There are no riots, there is no looting. The protestors were just trying to save all those color TVs from getting destroyed when that lightning came out of they blue sky and burned down your store!

Chigger wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:25 pm

lilwoody wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:27 pm

Flame Red wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am They hope the MOB comes to burn down the block and insurance pays off. I suggest putting up several BLM signs as that seem to attract them for burning. Insurance pays off for Rioting/Looting.

But when the Civil War is declared, no insurance anymore. So you best hurry!

This is the main reason Trump has not instuted The Insurection Act. As soon as he is forced into doing it ALL insurance companies are off the hook for the losses to these Maoists, anachronistic, street criminals and common scum.
What should be done is go after the deepest pockets in this destruction and there is president to do it. Just as the Klan was broken by civil suits the exact same can be done to BLM.

Insurance companies for years have already put wavers on civil unrest and terrorism. I bet a lot of folks would be surprised if they read their insurance policy.

That this is 9/11, I'm wondering if insurance paid off on the towers and other damaged buildings in the area. Since we "went to war" after the attack, could the insurance companies have got off the hook?

REDinFL wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:23 am

That this is 9/11, I'm wondering if insurance paid off on the towers and other damaged buildings in the area. Since we "went to war" after the attack, could the insurance companies have got off the hook?

I don't think insurance had to pay out as I think the Fed's bailed everyone out! They printed more and more worthless $. Or actually added some more zeroes to the Fed balance sheet on some computer system.

Same ol’, same ol’, Red:
Privatize the gains...
Socialize the losses.
Exactly what the Fed + Gov’t is doing right now with the fake Covid pandemic.
R/Griff

REDinFL wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:23 am

Chigger wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:25 pm

lilwoody wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:27 pm

This is the main reason Trump has not instuted The Insurection Act. As soon as he is forced into doing it ALL insurance companies are off the hook for the losses to these Maoists, anachronistic, street criminals and common scum.
What should be done is go after the deepest pockets in this destruction and there is president to do it. Just as the Klan was broken by civil suits the exact same can be done to BLM.

Insurance companies for years have already put wavers on civil unrest and terrorism. I bet a lot of folks would be surprised if they read their insurance policy.

That this is 9/11, I'm wondering if insurance paid off on the towers and other damaged buildings in the area. Since we "went to war" after the attack, could the insurance companies have got off the hook?

Towers were owned by port authorities of NY and NJ. They sold the leasing rights to Larry Silverstein who financed the rights with the primary lender being GMAC commercial. GMAC's ceo was former NSA in Vietnam and kept his security clearance since they did business all over the world, he could keep track of where trouble spots were around the world.

The financing deal was completed in August, month before they came down. The deal was contigent on terrorism insurance coverage even though it really wasn't heard of at the time. The ceo realized the towers were a target since they had been attacked before.
It took if I remember a dozen insurance companies to cover the financing. Premium was high, but insurance companies didn't see the risk as did the GMAC ceo.

They completed the deal. Month later they came down.

Insurance paid off very well, in fact Larry sued the insurance companies that there were two seperate attacks, won and they had to pay out double everyone walked away without any loss. GMAC ceo went on to be invited to Bush white house to be involved with developing terrorism insurance coverage and signing into law.

Days after the towers came down FBI visited GMAC ceo to see why he insisted on insurance coverage and did he know something before hand, which he did not. He was just a brilliant finance guy who realized if the towers were ever attacked again before the note was paid off, the company would be bankrupt.