Today, I want to share why I think you should interview real estate agents before hiring one. Why You Should Interview Real Estate Agents Truth be told, I have only purchased one house and I'm in the process of selling it. My husband and I thought long and hard about whether we would try to sell our property on our own or hire someone to represent us. In the end, we chose the latter. If you have ever shared with friends or family that you're looking for a home or thinking of selling your own, most everyone says something along the lines of, "Oh! I know a realtor I can recommend!" Many of you may know a real estate agent personally as well. I still think it makes sense to interview any prospective agents because they are being paid by you. When you hire someone to do work on your home, you get estimates and gather information about how and when the work will be done. When you are looking for babysitters, you meet them and see how they'll interact with your child. When you're an employer, you interview any potential employees. Don't Take The Easy Route with Previous Agents and Friends Just because a friend is a realtor, doesn't mean they'll be the best real estate agent for you. Just because a friend recommends their realtor to you, doesn't mean you have to hire him/her. It's business and nobody should take it personally. Interviewing real estate agents just makes sense. Oftentimes, people don't. Why not just use the realtor that sold you the house you're currently in? Well, you can. But do you know how that realtor handles business when they are the listing agent versus the buyer's agent? Do you know if they'll want to pursue the option to be a dual agent (and double their commission)? Why not interview them while interviewing others? It won't hurt. The author will most likely A. sell their house on their own B. not enough information C. interview realtors D. list the house in the paper
C

I'm sitting at the airport on a Sunday morning waiting for my flight to Las Vegas for the now-annual pilgrimage to the NamesCon conference. A few years ago, Vegas was one of my "bucket list" places one of those iconic cities that one should visit at least once in their life. For me, once was enough. This is now my 4th (I think?) trip to Vegas, and while the city has a lot to offer, it's just not my cup of tea. For one thing, I'm not a gambler, like at all. I don't have anything against it, I just don't enjoy it. It either feels pointless or stressful to me. The city itself makes me a little sad in some cases, it reeks of desperation. Last time I was there, my cab driver entertained me with stories of how she was working 3 jobs to save up enough to join some mega-massive bingo game. She won a small jackpot a few years back and that allowed her to work only one job for a few months. She was hoping to win again so she could cut back to 1 or 2 jobs. I wondered how many people do similar things gambling their money away, in big or small chunks, in the hopes of that big score and in the process, putting themselves in a not-great financial situation. I suppose as long it makes them happy, then it's all OK, but I can't help but think someone like my cab driver might be happier overall if she only worked 1 job instead of 3, instead of working extra jobs to save up money to gamble her way to financial freedom. But that's for her to decide, not me. The juxtaposition of extreme and in-your-face wealth and the homeless people on the Strip also makes me sad. It's difficult to see people begging for food and sleeping on the street while all around you, millions of dollars are poured into creating a massive playground with every type of indulgence possible. But I'm the first to say that I've enjoyed staying in some of the nicer hotel properties there and eating several excellent meals at some of the finer restaurants in the area, so I'm not exactly helping to solve the problem. When did the cab driver have enough money to only work 1 job? A. during a jackpot win B. before winning a jackpot C. after winning a jackpot D. not enough information
C

In a rare display of bipartisan unity during an election year, Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump for his comments about the ethnicity of a judge overseeing a class action suit against Trump University. Members of both parties lambasted the real estate mogul for remarks that they assert were racist. Trump said he felt U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel, because of his "Mexican heritage," would not rule fairly in the case that charged Trump with fraud. Curiel is an American who was born and raised in the midwestern U.S. state of Indiana. U.S. Senator Ben Sasse, a Republican from Nebraska who has criticized Trump on multiple occasions during the campaign, tweeted: "Saying someone can't do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of 'racism.''' Also leading the charge Monday were Trump's two former rivals for the Republican nomination. Ohio Governor John Kasich tweeted that Trump's offensive "is flat out wrong.'' Trump, Kasich wrote, should "apologize to Judge Curiel & try to unite this country.'' Florida Senator Marco Rubio agreed. "It's wrong and I hope he stops.'' But no mea culpa was forthcoming from the candidate. Trump insisted earlier Monday that Curiel could not be impartial in the legal action against him because the jurist's parents were born in Mexico and Trump wants to build a wall along the Mexican border. Republican Senator Susan Collins called Trump's comments "absolutely unacceptable." Democratic Congressman Filemon Vela said in an open letter published Monday that Trump's "ignorant anti-immigrant opinions," border wall rhetoric and continued attacks on a sitting federal judge "are just plain despicable." Vela, who represents a district along the U.S.-Mexico border, says his great-great-grandfather came to the U.S. in 1857 well before Trump's ancestors. Vela wrote, "Mr. Trump you are a racist and you can take your border wall and shove it." Kasich, Rubio and Collins joined other top... After the end of the story Trump probably: A. not enough information B. makes more comments about Curiel that are controversial C. apologizes to Curiel D. moves on and doesn't apologize to Curiel
D