Showing posts with label Seattle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Seattle. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

[VIDEO] Rents are rising, but there are ways to stretch your dollar

If you're paying more for rent this year, you're not alone. Rents climbed an average of 15 percent across the country between 2009 and 2014, according to a recent analysis by the National Association of Realtors, and the cost to rent in some markets like New York, Seattle and San Francisco has jumped more than 20 percent.
Renters nationwide can now expect to spend 30 percent of their income on rent, according to a new report from the real estate data firm Zillow, which noted that rental affordability worsened year over year in 28 of the 35 largest metro areas covered by the company.
Lawrence Yun, chief economist at the NAR, attributes rising rents to "supply constraints" in housing and rentals: fewer rentals means higher prices. And millennial renters have been particularly hard hit, as rents are rising faster than income levels in many markets. "It's very demoralizing," he said.
But that doesn't mean you can't get a good deal—even in high-rent cities. Here's how to get the most for your money no matter where you live.
Expand your search. Rent is often highest in the hottest areas of a city. Even moving a couple subway stops or highway exits away can make a big difference in what you'll pay, said Paul Magyar of Mirador Real Estate in New York City.
For example, the average price of a one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan was nearly $3,200 (in a nondoorman building) in July, according to the latest rental market report from real estate group MNS. But the average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Harlem, an area that is rapidly gentrifying, was $2,145—far less than the city's overall average rent and $700 less per month than the average one-bedroom rent in the neighboring Upper West Side neighborhood. And Harlem is only one or two stops away from midtown Manhattan on an express subway line.
Moving a little further outside a city can also save money. But it's worth factoring in the cost of owning a car and paying for gas if you're considering a suburban rental versus living in a city with good public transportation.
Decide your budget and stick to it. Before you start looking, figure out what you can afford to pay each month. Experts suggest spending no more than 25 to 33 percent of your income on rent. "It's not an investment," said Catherine Seeber, a senior financial advisor at Wescott Financial Advisory Group in Philadelphia. And you want to make sure you have enough money set aside for emergencies and other expenses. (A new Zillow analysis found renters with a high burden—those who spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent—have a median savings rate of zero.)
Don't forget incidentals. Be sure to find out what's included in the rent and what's not (like water, heat and laundry). Seeber also recommends making sure your landlord, building superintendent or management company will be easily accessible. Otherwise, if you need an emergency repair, it could end up costing you time—and money, if you pay out of pocket with no guarantee of reimbursement.
Consider a roommate. Splitting the rent with a roommate means you can often afford a nicer apartment than you could on your own. Not only will you save money on rent, but you can split the cost of utilities, Wi-Fi and other bills.
Check the out clause. Find out what's entailed if you or your landlord wants to end the lease early. Not only do you want to know what you might be responsible for if you need to move before your lease ends, but you want to know what to expect if an owner decides to sell the unit or move into it. If that happens, you could end up looking for a new place and paying moving fees before you planned on it, said Brian Morgan a realtor for Citi Habitats in New York City (where you may be on the hook for another broker's fee as well).
You could also consider living in a more reasonably priced city like Detroit, Memphis, Tennessee, or Lexington, Kentucky, where the NAR noted incomes have risen faster than rents. Although the same rules apply there too, of course.

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Black Lives Matter Racists Strike Again

insert picture
Ferguson, MO turned once again into a scene of violent race hatred when a man police authorities say opened fire on them on the anniversary of Michael Brown’s death was critically wounded when police returned fire. He released a “remarkable amount of gunfire” against the officers using a stolen handgun, explained St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar. That incident occurred shortly after “an exchange of gunfire between two groups” Belmar described as criminals, not protesters. “There is a small group of people out there that are intent on making sure that peace doesn’t prevail,” he said.

So-called “peaceful” protests in Ferguson on Sunday descended into shootings, as well as protesters pelting cops with rocks and bottles. Protestors marking the one-year anniversary of the confrontation between Michael Brown and officer Darren Wilson that resulted in Brown’s death roasted and ate a pig with a policeman’s hat on its head and the words #Darren Wilson scrawled on its body. Make no mistake, the roasted, consumed pig represented more than Darren Wilson, but was a representation of “white” police forces, whom #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) activist view as the enforcers of the white power structure that deliberately oppresses black people. As the protest worn on in Ferguson, people once again engaged in looting a beauty store, police were injured by debris tossed at them, and members of the mob chanted, “We’re ready for what? We’re ready for war.”

On Saturday at Westlake Park in Seattle, WA Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) was ultimately driven from the stage when a group of BLM protestors stepped on the podium and took control of the microphone. Sanders was on hand to celebrate the 80th anniversary of Social Security and Medicare. He had begun to deliver his address thanking Seattle for being “one of the most progressive cities in the United States of America.” That was as far as he got before two women strolled onto the stage and grabbed the microphone. One of the two made their intentions clear. “If you do not listen to her, your event will be shut down now,” Sanders was told. After an exchange ensued with screaming protesters, event organizers relented and allowed the demonstrators to proceed.

The largely white crowd was not particularly appreciative, showering the protesters with boos and chants about allowing Sanders to speak. A few urged the police to take control. That was too much for protester Marissa Johnson. “I was going to tell Bernie how racist this city is, filled with its progressives, but you did it for me,” she declared. And true to the racist underpinnings of BLM movement Johnson further insisted the audience was guilty of “white supremacist liberalism.”


Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Why Did Seattle Restaurants Lose 1,000 Jobs? Report Blames The Minimum Wage

restaurants lose 1000 jobs in seattle - Google Search

According to a report released Sunday by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the $15 minimum wage has caused Seattle restaurants to lose 1,000 jobs — the worst decline since the 2009 Great Recession.
“The loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs in May following the minimum wage increase in April was the largest one month job decline since a 1,300 drop in January 2009, again during the Great Recession,” AEI Scholar Mark J. Perry noted in the report.
The citywide minimum wage increase was passed in June of last year. The measure is designed to increase the city minimum wage gradually to $15 an hour by 2017. The first increase under the plan was to $11 an hour in April. According to the report, Seattle restaurants have already faced severe consequences as a result. In contrast, in the six years since the 2009 financial crisis, the industry has been recovering in areas without the $15 minimum wage.
“Restaurant employment nationally increased by 130,700 jobs (and by 1.2%) during that same period,” the report also noted. “Restaurant employment in Washington increased 3.2% and by 2,800 jobs.”
Supporters of the $15 minimum wage often argue it will help the poor and stimulate economic activity. Opponents, however, argue such policies will actually hurt the poor by limiting job opportunities. How little or how much of either outcome usually depends on the study. Nevertheless, even the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) agrees at least some job loss is expected.
Studies also show that industries with low profit margins, like restaurants, are more likely to be hit the hardest. A June report from the investor rating service Moody’s claims the minimum wage doesn’t even have to go up to $15 an hour for negative effects to occur.
According to a report released Sunday by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the $15 minimum wage has caused Seattle restaurants to lose 1,000 jobs — the worst decline since the 2009 Great Recession.
“The loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs in May following the minimum wage increase in April was the largest one month job decline since a 1,300 drop in January 2009, again during the Great Recession,” AEI Scholar Mark J. Perry noted in the report.
The citywide minimum wage increase was passed in June of last year. The measure is designed to increase the city minimum wage gradually to $15 an hour by 2017. The first increase under the plan was to $11 an hour in April. According to the report, Seattle restaurants have already faced severe consequences as a result. In contrast, in the six years since the 2009 financial crisis, the industry has been recovering in areas without the $15 minimum wage.
“Restaurant employment nationally increased by 130,700 jobs (and by 1.2%) during that same period,” the report also noted. “Restaurant employment in Washington increased 3.2% and by 2,800 jobs.”
Supporters of the $15 minimum wage often argue it will help the poor and stimulate economic activity. Opponents, however, argue such policies will actually hurt the poor by limiting job opportunities. How little or how much of either outcome usually depends on the study. Nevertheless, even the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) agrees at least some job loss is expected.
Studies also show that industries with low profit margins, like restaurants, are more likely to be hit the hardest. A June report from the investor rating service Moody’s claims the minimum wage doesn’t even have to go up to $15 an hour for negative effects to occur.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Seattle moves forward with “gun violence tax” on all weapons, ammo

[SO LAW ABIDING CITIZENS WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PROTECT THEMSELVES BUT THE CRIMINAL'S  WILL STILL HAVE THE WEAPONS.]

Retired minister and gun owner Jack Severns participated in the rally to ban assault weapons.
This week the Seattle City Council moved one step closer to imposing a sweeping sales tax on both weapons and ammunition which appears to fly in the face of a thirty year old state law banning such restrictions. A committee vote took place on Wednesday and the proposal will move to a full vote tomorrow. And this is just a bad deal all the way around.
The committee voted unanimously this morning to send the proposal to the full city council for consideration next Monday, according to the Seattle P-I.com. Monday’s vote could set the stage for a legal confrontation, and there were hints that existing gun shops could move out of the city, and that gun owners living in Seattle will simply shop outside the city, thus thwarting any dreams that this tax will generate $300,000 to $500,000 annually for the city’s gun control efforts.
Waiting in the legal tall grass are the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. They’ve already advised against the tax proposal, primarily on the grounds that it will violate the state’s 30-year-old model preemption law.
Even if this move were to pass muster in terms of the state’s preemption law, it is bound to accomplish very little beyond the thinly veiled intent of punishing lawful gun owners and gun shops. A tax such as this is certain to do almost nothing to total volume of sales except for those truly living on the edge and simply shifts business from one location to another. NRA ILAsummarizes the concept.
The burden of regressive taxes like the Seattle proposal falls squarely on those that are least able to afford them. Persons of means will simply drive outside the city to purchase firearms and ammunition, while those without such options will be forced to go forego their rights or pay the tax. This is especially egregious considering how those at the lower end of the economic scale also tend to reside in areas where violent crime is the highest. One wonders whether this type of social engineering on the downtrodden is an intended feature of the legislation rather than an unfortunate consequence.
Supporters are claiming that this tax could bring in a half million dollars in revenue, but under the best of circumstances that sounds vastly inflated. It also doesn’t take into account how much it could affect the local market. As one local gun dealer pointed out, it’s a competitive sales space and they already sell pretty much on the margins. If he has to jack up the price of a ten or fifteen dollar box of ammunition by five dollars, shooters will simply go outside the city limits and buy their rounds where the tax is not applied. The same goes for new gun purchases. If sales plummet, the tax revenue goes down by default and if the shops close, the revenue disappears entirely.
Of course, that’s been the idea all along. This isn’t a tax intended to raise revenue for vital services. It’s a political statement. That’s why the supporters of the proposal even call it the gun violence tax. They’re not expecting to raise cash or reduce violence. They’re simply looking to show their base constituents how “serious” they are about restricting gun rights. The irony behind all of this is that the city will doubtless face a series of expensive lawsuits if the tax is put in place and they’ll probably lose. In the end they will wind up getting no revenue and the taxpayers will be stuck with the bill for the court costs and associated expenses.
But hey… this is Seattle. What did you really expect?


Sunday, August 9, 2015

THOUGHTS ON BERNIE SANDERS BEING FORCED OFF STAGE BY BLACK LIVES MATTER AGITATORS - UPDATE


They would also disrupted Sanders and Martin O'Malley during their appearance at the Netroots Convention in Phoenix last month and cut considerably into their speaking time.
What I find interesting is how The Left is gloating over the Republican Party row over Donald Trump. In his usual smug form, Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone claims that Republicans, Fox News, talk radio and the conservative blogosphere have created a monster that's now turning on them. Could Taibbi please tell me exactly how many Republican presidential candidates have been forced off the stage of their own rallies?

Black Lives Matter is a creation of the Democratic Party, the mainstream media, Hollywood and the left-wing blogosphere. And when their creation can force Bernie Sanders off the stage and prevent him from speaking then it has surely become a monster. But don't expect the Democratic Party, the mainstream media, Hollywood and the left-wing blogosphere to ever describe Black Lives Matter in this manner. 

UPDATE: As a couple of readers have pointed out, the rally from which Sanders was unceremoniously evicted was one commemorating Social Security & Medicare and wasn't a Sanders for President event. Nevertheless, it doesn't change the fact he was forced off stage by outside agitators. There is a difference between that and Donald Trump having his invitation to the Red State event. While one might object to Erik Erickson's decision, I cannot imagine a scenario in which conservative activists would jump on stage uninvited and force a Republican presidential hopeful off-stage and not permit him or her speak.




Tuesday, August 4, 2015

[VIDEO] Seattle’s $15 Minimum Wage Law Just Came Back To Bite Them In A Totally Unexpected Way

Early indicators suggest that the $15 minimum wage is a "lose, lose" proposition for employers and employees.
As the push continues in various locations around the country to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour, the real world consequences of such a move have begun to surface.
Seattle became the first city in the nation to implement the $15 per hour minimum wage this past spring. Fox News reports that one unintended effect is that workers who are earning the higher wage are asking for fewer hours, so they can remain eligible for low income government benefits like childcare and tax credits.
Full Life Care, a home nursing nonprofit, told KIRO-TV in Seattle that several workers want to work less.
Local radio talk show host Jason Rantz on KIRO-FM noted the irony: “If [employees] cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the $15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people.”
“Despite a booming economy throughout western Washington, the state’s welfare caseload has dropped very little since the higher wage phase began in Seattle in April. In March 130,851 people were enrolled in the Basic Food program. In April, the caseload dropped to 130,376,” according to Fox News.

Monday, August 3, 2015

Liberal Seattle CEO who instituted minimum salary of $70,000 finds that doesn’t work so well

In a way, I have to admit, I have some sympathy for Dan Price and his quixotic quest to battle “income inequality” by instituting a minimum salary of $70,000 for all employees of his company. Not for the cause itself, which is merely the latest trend in left-wing economic illiteracy, but I too once ran a business in which I thought I could do amazing things by paying people way more than their experience levels or qualifications would earn them anywhere else.


It didn’t work for two reasons. First, a business can’t survive when employees can’t generate enough value to give you a big enough return on what you pay them. And if they can’t do that because you paid them too much, that’s not on them. It’s on you. Second, people don’t appreciate what they haven’t really earned. You think they’re going to be grateful and loyal to you because you were so good to them. It doesn’t work that way.

So as soon as I heard some months back that Price was going to wage his own one-man war against “income inequality” by paying everyone at Gravity Payments a minimum of $70,000 - and would even cut his own pay to help the company swing it - it wasn’t hard to see this coming:

What few outsiders realized, however, was how much turmoil all the hoopla was causing at the company itself. To begin with, Gravity was simply unprepared for the onslaught of emails, Facebook posts and phone calls. The attention was thrilling, but it was also exhausting and distracting. And with so many eyes focused on the firm, some hoping to witness failure, the pressure has been intense.

More troubling, a few customers, dismayed by what they viewed as a political statement, withdrew their business. Others, anticipating a fee increase — despite repeated assurances to the contrary — also left. While dozens of new clients, inspired by Mr. Price’s announcement, were signing up, those accounts will not start paying off for at least another year. To handle the flood, he has already had to hire a dozen additional employees — now at a significantly higher cost — and is struggling to figure out whether more are needed without knowing for certain how long the bonanza will last. 
Two of Mr. Price’s most valued employees quit, spurred in part by their view that it was unfair to double the pay of some new hires while the longest-serving staff members got small or no raises. Some friends and associates in Seattle’s close-knit entrepreneurial network were also piqued that Mr. Price’s action made them look stingy in front of their own employees.
Then potentially the worst blow of all: Less than two weeks after the announcement, Mr. Price’s older brother and Gravity co-founder, Lucas Price, citing longstanding differences, filed a lawsuit that potentially threatened the company’s very existence. With legal bills quickly mounting and most of his own paycheck and last year’s $2.2 million in profits plowed into the salary increases, Dan Price said, “We don’t have a margin of error to pay those legal fees.”
It wasn’t just good, experienced employees who had a problem with the plan. So did at least one employee who was a recipient of a huge raise:


Friday, July 31, 2015

Higher wages a surprising success for Seattle restaurant

THIS IS ONE RESTAURANT OUT OF HUNDREDS, AND DOES NOT SPELL SUCCESS IN BY BOOK!!


Menu prices are up 21 percent and you don't have to tip at Ivar's Salmon House on Seattle's Lake Union after the restaurant decided to institute the city's $15-an-hour minimum wage two years ahead of schedule.
It is staff, not diners, who feel the real difference, with wages as much as 60 percent higher than before. One waitress is saving for accounting classes and finding it easier to take weekend vacations, while another server is using the added pay to cover increased rent.
Seattle's law, adopted last year after a strong push from labor and grassroots activists, bumped the city's minimum wage to $11 beginning April 1, above Washington state's highest-in-the-nation $9.47. Scheduled increases that depend on business size and benefits will bring the minimum to $15 within four years for large businesses and seven years for smaller ones.
There's little data yet on how the law's working.
"To the extent that we can look at macro patterns, we're not seeing a problem," said Seattle Mayor Ed Murray.
As Washington, D.C., and other cities consider following Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles in phasing in a $15-an-hour minimum wage, Ivar's approach, adopted in April, offers lessons in how some businesses might adapt. Ivar's Seafood Restaurants President Bob Donegan decided to raise prices, tell customers that they don't need to tip, and parcel the added revenue among the hourly staff.
For some of the restaurant's lesser paid workers - including bussers and dishwashers - that's meant as much as 60 percent more. Revenue has soared, supportive customers are leaving additional tips even though they don't need to, and servers and bartenders are on pace to increase their annual pay by thousands, with wages for a few of the best compensated approaching $80,000 a year.
"It's been a surprise," Donegan said. "The customers seem to like it, the employees seem to like it, and it seems to be working, at least in this location."
Rochelle Hann, 25, is a second-generation worker at Ivar's. Like her mom, she has performed a variety of roles, including serving, bookkeeping and even dressing up as a giant clam. If she keeps working 30 hours a week, her annual pay will jump about $12,000 - money she's socking away for accounting classes at a community college.
"Before, I felt like it was maybe not quite paycheck-to-paycheck, but now I don't even have to worry about it," she said. "I just went away for the weekend, and it was an easy expense."
Brett Richards, a 50-year-old singer and guitarist, has worked 25 years in food service, including the past eight at Ivar's. Before, he made minimum wage, plus tips. Now, he gets $15 an hour, plus a share of the 21 percent menu price increase, plus any additional tips customers leave. He expects to make almost $7,000 more this year, money that's helping him with his increased rent and with taking his kids out to eat a little more often.
Via: CNBC
Continue Reading....

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Raise Minimum Wage and Workers Cut Hours to Keep Welfare

Reportedly, Seattle’s law to raise minimum wage is running into a conflict with the welfare state.


McDonald’s and Walmart were smeared with this term because anyone who was trying to live on a single income as one of their employees would need government assistance to live. The idea was pushed that McDonald’s and Walmart are getting subsidized labor.

Mark replied to one economist pushing this message.

It is not only legal, it is exactly what the welfare state wanted and expected. It is sickening hypocrisy to favor the welfare state (which [Barry] Ritholz does) and pretend that such support does not empower employers to pay their employees less. It isn’t just McDonald’s and Walmart. It is every independent convenience store franchise owner. McDonald’s didn’t create this situation. Walmart didn’t dream up welfare entitlements and then lobby to get them passed as a long-term strategy to pay employees less. If you don’t want people to benefit from free stuff, then stop offering it to them.

Well, now we have more experimental data on the issue, since Seattle has raised the minimum wage. According to Fox News, “Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit.”

Fallout” is another term for unintended consequences or unintended results.

Seattle’s $15 minimum wage law is supposed to lift workers out of poverty and move them off public assistance. But there may be a hitch in the plan.

Evidence is surfacing that some workers are asking their bosses for fewer hours as their wages rise – in a bid to keep overall income down so they don’t lose public subsidies for things like food, child care and rent.

Full Life Care, a home nursing nonprofit, told KIRO-TV in Seattle that several workers want to work less.

“If they cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the $15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people,” said Jason Rantz, host of the Jason Rantz show on 97.3 KIRO-FM.

How common is this? I don’t know. But it doesn’t seem like many people have been enabled to get less assistance after the raising of the minimum wage.

The notion that employees are intentionally working less to preserve their welfare has been a hot topic on talk radio. While the claims are difficult to track, state stats indeed suggest few are moving off welfare programs under the new wage.

Despite a booming economy throughout western Washington, the state’s welfare caseload has dropped very little since the higher wage phase began in Seattle in April. In March 130,851 people were enrolled in the Basic Food program. In April, the caseload dropped to 130,376.

The bottom line is that the government is distorting the economy by interfering in the employer-employee relationship with both minimum wage laws and welfare payments. The government needs to let people negotiate their lives with free people so that wages and prices are set at the right balance point. Every time the government “helps” someone it creates more problems, which it then attempts to solve with more “help” that creates yet more problems.



[OPINION] Guy Leaving ‘No Tip’ Cards Because Of Seattle’s $15 Minimum Wage Is An Idiot And Here’s Why

(Photo Credit: LOUISA GOULIAMAKI/AFP/Getty Images)
(Photo Credit: LOUISA GOULIAMAKI/AFP/Getty Images)
Ladies and gentleman, we finally have a hero among us willing to go toe to toe against the evil forces known as the “minimum wage”! There’s only one problem…
He doesn’t seem to understand how it works.
The “it” in this case is the $15 an hour minimum wage that went into effect earlier this year in Seattle, which isn’t unlike Chicago’s recent $13 minimum wage hike. To be clear, the fact that it went into effect does NOT mean all workers in Seattle now receive $15 bucks an hour. Similarly, all Chicago workers are not currently making $13 an hour. Before I get to that explanation, I want to first address the “idiot”…
(To be absolutely clear, this article is not against people who don’t like the minimum wage or tipping culture. This article is against idiots spreading falsehoods.)
According to WTKR, a bartender named Anthony Fetto in Seattle recently received a unique tip. Instead of giving Fetto cash, the customer left him an “informational” card dubbed “Why I don’t tip in Seattle.” The card gives its recipients a free “economy” lesson detailing the many ways the $15 minimum wage is bad.
Basically, the card is an excuse not to tip. It relies on the idea that waiters and bartenders are making a whopping $15 bucks an hour. But, of course, that idea is false.
“At least come up and tell me personally…” Fetto responded. “Don’t be very passive aggressive and just kind of leave this and walk away without saying anything.”
You can read the card’s wisdom for yourself below…
So why isn’t Fetto making the $15 bucks the “info card” claims?

Timeline Photos

Anyone who’s bothered reading Seattle’s new minimum wage law (and if you’re going to be leaving cards based on the law that make you sound like a self-righteous jerk, you should probably read it) would know that the law takes effect gradually. So yes, the law went into effect in April of this year, but the minimum wage isn’t actually $15 yet.
For employers with fewer than 500 employees, for example, the minimum wage is currently $10 bucks and won’t be $15 until 2021.
For employers that have employees that receive tips, things are a bit less straightforward. For tip-based jobs, employees receive a minimum compensation. A minimum compensation is based off a combination of hourly wages AND tips (and medical benefits, if applicable).
Yes, that is right, though waiters and waitresses will theoretically be paid $15 bucks an hour by 2019, that number is supposed to include tips..
These facts basically nullify our mystery man’s “tip card.” Listen, if you’re going to be a jerk, the least you can do is get your facts straight.
In Chicago, despite the $13 minimum wage law, the current minimum wage is $10. That will slowly go up until 2019, when it will become $13 bucks.
And even though the minimum wage in Chicago is currently $10, the minimum wage for tipped employees is actually $5.45. So please, don’t be a jerk by refusing to tip your waitress!
Want to study up on the many intricacies of these laws so you don’t look like an idiot? Read about Seattle’s here and Chicago’s here.
Mason Johnson is a Web Content Producer for CBS Chicago. You can find him on Twitter.

Popular Posts