I just read a post on one of the leading real estate organization's forum. A poster was asking for feedback on his 5 year investment strategy. It was to buy cash-flowing income properties, with "gross income of about 10% and cap rate of 7%"
The responding posters indicated that this plan was flawed, as cash-flowing properties were impossible to find, save in "high risk, resource dependent small towns in (the north) or low growth US towns".
First of all, these numbers aren't that good, and I probably would pass up those kind of deals, unless I knew I could significantly raise the income (ie adding another unit).
There are tons of great, cash flowing properties just about everywhere you look. And exactly what is "high risk"? Some of these "towns" are our best cash cows, and have been for years. They have also been for years before we bought the buildings as well. In some cases for over 100 years!
Sure, there are some one horse towns that are too far for commuting and have no local jobs, but for the most part, those are already ghost towns. As we recommend investing locally, you already know which towns are good and which are bad.
People need places to live, even in "towns"!