Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,157,672 times
Reputation: 8105
I dunno, I think Hawaii is vastly over-rated unless you're a surfer/beach bum. It's great when you step off the plane and maybe get a lei put on you by an attractive young person, but from there on it's all downhill. Most places there are just not as beautiful or unique as you might think from the travel brochures.
It would be a decent choice if it were no more expensive than Florida or some similar place, but it's not worth moving there and having to break the piggy bank in search of quarters to buy some cheap rice.
Employers pay 7.65% into social security and Medicare on all taxable wages. Unlike the employee portion, there are no statutory limits on the employer portion. Therefore, employers pay about 52% of the social security tax.
Hey Jlaw,
That is factually true depending on how you define 7.65%. The employers are paying based on employee salaries, so effectively it is a tax that is reducing what the employees bring home and is tied directly to compensation levels.
When I talk about capital returning to capital rather than labor I'm saying that the company is keeping the profits in either retained earnings or paying it out in dividends or interest. Both the shareholders and debt holders have a financial interest in the company and expect a financial return.
When capital flows to capital the way that capital flows is through methods, such as corporate income, that are not exposed to the social security and medicare taxes. The shareholders do not receive dividends as taxable wages (in most companies, not explaining the others here). Therefore, the flow of capital to capital circumvents the method through which social security and medicare are funded.
Whether the employee or employer reports the tax that is paid on wages is merely a matter of accounting. The expense remains the same and is still based on wages and ignoring the profits of the company.
Even though I love Hawaii, I would get bored in Kauai long before the five years were up.
The beauty of the Hawaiian Islands is that quick puddle jumps are frequent and cheap. I have never gone to any single island and only stayed there.
Instead I have spent X amount of days on one, then it was off to another. I have been fortunate enough to have stayed on all 6 islands over the course of a handful of trips.
I am hoping to get back early next year. I also keep watching this show called Hawaii Life about people moving there from the mainland. While there are no immediate plans to move there, I could certainly see retiring there. Then again I've never been to Australia, so that must come first.
be honest: haven't you really already decided on Hawaii?
My opinion would be to choose your 'forever' home now. Not just because of the money but also because it can be hard for some folks to make friends outside their job.
Also, I've been to HI and didn't like it.
But, as I said, it really sounds like you've already deep down inside chosen Hawaii. Go for it. You will never regret following your heart.
I've lived so many places, I'd really love to find the place that we can call home the rest of our lives, build our house and live happily ever after. I keep applying to areas that, at first glance, might be it. The NOVA location, the more we study it, is probably not it. I took this Atlanta job and we're 5hrs from the kids in FL. We have REALLY enjoyed visiting them any long weekend we have. We might call this forever (in the right area, way north of Atlanta) but my job isn't a permanent status at this point. It will be a gamble if we stay and try to bank on it being converted to a permanent job. It's good for a few more years. I took it to get back to the mainland from Oahu and to expand my resume. I think the Coast Guard is the only branch I haven't worked for now. I knew they'd want to keep me once I got here and they do but there's a funding thing that complicates it.
We do love Hawaii. I already know some of the coworkers over there in Kauaii. Still, it's not a sure thing so I know someone else might get the job. And if I don't get it I'll add it to the dozens and dozens of jobs I'm not hired for. No biggee. There's a possibility, though and I really want to have my mind made up what my answer will be if I have to give them an answer.
I have other applications out there that would be a better fit over Hawaii but they aren't moving at this moment. We really do love New England (not just the Patriots).
Thanks to everyone who's replied and I really am thinking hard about the things you're saying. What I want is for my guy to be happy, since I'm dragging him around for my career. He works no matter what, he's built some great decks and has more stuff lined up here where we are. I know he'd be happiest where he can get his business reestablished. He would love Hawaii but is hesitant about what he'd do to contribute if we went there. Then the "not a promotion" thing. I really like the thought of moving into a job that would be a move up. No, I'm not fully sold on HI. The more sensibly I think the less I like the idea.
That is factually true depending on how you define 7.65%. The employers are paying based on employee salaries, so effectively it is a tax that is reducing what the employees bring home and is tied directly to compensation levels.
When I talk about capital returning to capital rather than labor I'm saying that the company is keeping the profits in either retained earnings or paying it out in dividends or interest. Both the shareholders and debt holders have a financial interest in the company and expect a financial return.
When capital flows to capital the way that capital flows is through methods, such as corporate income, that are not exposed to the social security and medicare taxes. The shareholders do not receive dividends as taxable wages (in most companies, not explaining the others here). Therefore, the flow of capital to capital circumvents the method through which social security and medicare are funded.
Whether the employee or employer reports the tax that is paid on wages is merely a matter of accounting. The expense remains the same and is still based on wages and ignoring the profits of the company.
Not sure where your accounting degree is from, but it would seem that the payment of the employer share of FICA reduced the profits of the company. At least it did in our small business. And the really big business I worked for.
Just a thought about moving to Hawaii....if you have a dog and intend to take him to Hawaii, the dog will have to be quarantined for 6 MONTHS. My friend moved there when her hubby was transferred and they had to give away their dog to a family member rather than send it to doggie prison for 6 months (that's a long time in dog years!).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
