Survivalist Forum banner

Real estate when shtf

6K views 33 replies 21 participants last post by  seeya 
#1 ·
So these days real estate (as a long term investment) is always a good investment. However I'm wondering if I have (let's just say) 60 acres of land and 7 houses on divided plats. When shtf will it be worth anything? I'm wondering if people will still pay you something of value or work off a house or something vs just coming with bigger guns than mine, saying 7 is too many and taking 1 or more? What do you think things will be like?
 
#3 ·
It is going to be highly dependent on the actual scenario. In most cases there will still be Rule of Law in effect, and options to continue to collect rent. Might not be a bad idea to put in the lease/rental contract alternative payment methods in case of such situations.

My plan, if I ever get the money to implement it is to have quadraplexes on large corner lots in small towns, with ex-military as live in manager/maintenance. With the live-in manager, even if covering several units in one town, I believe it will be easier to make arrangements to keep people in the units that are both productive and will help defend the place.

The other option I want to incorporate is full or partial ownership of working farms/ranches. Not only is there income potential, by having farm products as part of the payment plan, there should be a pretty good source of continuing, long term food supplies.

Also, having the means to buy up properties during the mid to late times of the disaster, for pennies on the dollar, is an option that might be considered. A bit cold hearted, but with a potential to make quite a bit once things settle down. If they do.

Just having rental properties without pretty constant personal contact, either by the owner or a good manager, with the tenants, isn't going to have much luck collecting rent during the crisis. Collecting it after things settle down are going to be problematical.

Just my opinion.
 
#4 ·
In the event of a full on TEOTWAWKI the people who hold the land will probably be those who can defend it, and all previous ownership contracts will be worthless pieces of paper.

However, I think a good portion of people even on these forums think a full on TEOTWAWKI is not that likely, including me.

I dont know know the answer to this, but you may like to look into how property ownership works in a place like Somalia or some other country where the rule of law is virtually non-existant.
 
#5 ·
I am a land owner and am not so concerned about losing it to people but losing it to the Gov't either through not being able to pay the taxes or outright confiscation. I am in the class of "don't think it will come to it though" If necessary I can see most all of it and can "hit" on almost all of it.
 
#10 ·
I am a land owner and am not so concerned about losing it to people but losing it to the Gov't either through not being able to pay the taxes or outright confiscation. I am in the class of "don't think it will come to it though" If necessary I can see most all of it and can "hit" on almost all of it.
That's what they would have said about TSA sexually abusing women and children a few years ago. 'Naw, not here! The men folk would kill them!'
 
#9 ·
That's true. Once a country takes a Communist turn, which we surely have, nationalism can happen at any time. I suspect it would have already happened if not for the 2nd Amendment and our heavily armed population. We ARE the biggest army in the world!

It would be best to buy land in a state where legislators, law enforcement, and the citizens are mostly on the side of the Constitution. Like ID, WY, TX, AZ, UT. I would avoid buying property in any heavily blue states especially if they are heavily in debt. I'm not pointing any out in particular.... BUT, I would avoid Ca. NY, NJ, and CT and in that order. Like the plague.

But that's just my own paranoid thinking. I am looking to buy land in Idaho where if SHTF the authorities of the state will be more likely to defend my and their rights, more closely, as originally laid out in the Constitution. None of the states are acting in a Constitutional manner these days. But there is definitely 'less' BAD.
 
#13 ·
What could you buy that is 100% guaranteed to not be confiscated or stolen?

The feds wouldn't need the end of the world to take your 60 acres. Maybe they just want to build a school or put in a airport.

What if they raised taxes 1000% every year until you couldn't afford to pay?
What if they put on rent controls so you couldn't charge what you needed to even cover taxes and upkeep?

You never know what would happen. The best we can do is diversify. If 7 homes is 10-25% of your savings it would be a good bet.
 
#14 ·
I love Minnesota but it is swiftly turning into a festering cesspool of greed and corruption. Our Gov is heir to the Dayton fortune, has never held a "real" job and is so out of touch with reality that it is getting harder to live here. Tax the land, tax the sky, tax the businesses as they are evil, tax tax tax, and to make matters worse the Liberal Metro area is growing far faster than outstate.

Find a state with no "real" metro areas or centers of power. Its almost like our brain fries out from the heat of all the pavement when you move to a Metro area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beatupoldcop
#18 ·
A true story from the great depression.

A man was buying lots, building houses, and selling them on land contract. The great depression hit: because his buyers could no longer make their land contract payments, he could not make his own building loan payments, and he lost the entire investment.

This story had a happy ending, of sorts. He did NOT! have a mortgage any longer on his home place, as it had been paid off. He did not lose the home place. So, he bought the small unsalable fruit from the local orange farmers, bottled the juice, and sold it to the local schools to serve inn the cafeterias. His family provided the labor. He lost a lot during the depression, but he did not lose it all.
 
#20 ·
During the Great Depression people still needed housing. Coming out of the GD, as soon as there was SS and an assortment of welfare programs, than even the out-of-work had cash flow and were able to pay rent.

Where guns came into play was as farmers defaulted on their mortgages, banks used the courts to legally take back land, and it was the sheriff deputies who used guns to evict the farmers.

Those who stood to profit were the bankers, lawyers and sheriff department.

Once the banks had became land heavy and cash light, each individual in that group [bankers, lawyers, LEOs] were on hand to conveniently buy property for pennies on the dollar.
 
#21 ·
It's important to define "real estate"....there is commercial, residential, agriculture, & resource real estate. Each one has a different dynamic in an apocalyptic scenario.

Commercial and residential real estate poses the most problems because they are both somewhat dependent on a healthy economic society.....not everyone needs a home when a tent or vehicle will do.

Agricultural and resource real estate produce items that both healthy and apocalyptic economies need.
 
#22 ·
It's important to define "real estate"....there is commercial, residential, agriculture, & resource real estate.


Agricultural and resource real estate produce items that both healthy and apocalyptic economies need.
Maybe but if you look at the great depression farmers dumped crops in the street to rot.If we run into fuel problem there might be no way to get it to market.I do agree it would be better than most but its not 100%
 
#23 ·
Not sure what crops were dumped in the streets during the depression, hard to imagine investing the labor and resources to harvest something....then throw it away. Fuel may be the one thing that makes the ag economy even more appealing....ethanol, bio fuels, and "shine". Commercial and residential real estate won't offer that option.
 
#24 ·
Grains were the hardest hit. It is hard to imagine but this is what happen.No one was buying. All the gain silos were full there was no where to put it.It cost more to hall it than you got to sell it.

After this it came a point when it cost more to plant it then they could get out. But a smaller loss is better than nothing right? So everyone was still farming and losing money. On top of it they increased crop sizes and made it worse the next year.

Of course some places were worse off than others.I am referencing the worse hit areas and timeline.On a side note, In most shtf cases the farther out you are the better but when you're trying to sell your crop this isn't the case.

You are right bio fuels are good for the farmer during the good times. There is a limit to how much they can process and how much they can store. In a shtf event if you can't get your crop to the factory you cant sell it. That is if the factory workers are showing up. (ops scenario)


Over all farmers had hard times during the great depression just like everyone else.
 
#25 ·
I am starting to believe that farmland is the way to go. Just bought 200 acres that I will lease to a local farmer to grow corn or soybean. I will be building a nice log cabin on one of the wooded hills, and plan on purchasing additional property in the area over the next few years. Can't be any worse than equities right now.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top