|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Through the years I have encountered teachers who managed to locate jobs in Asia that paid better (higher salary + similar or better benefits), but they were few and far between... and those jobs have also disappeared as TEFL teacher numbers have multiplied. But I have to admit that I don't follow the Asia situation that closely.
Personally I haven't noticed that people over-emphasized the free housing benefit. I have always considered it part of the full package that made it a worthwhile plunge... equal to the tax-free part. Having a house back home which was rented in reality paid me enough to cover 100% of my living expenses - basic, splurges, & extra travel beyond the free ticket. So, in effect that allowed me to save 100% of my salary for 5 or 6 years - actually more than 100%.
That even beats the 1 Riyal club. 
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
denise
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 3419
Location: finally home-ish
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cleopatra wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But on these threads I have seen people say you can't find a deal like the Gulf anywhere else. |
Well, maybe people who have enjoyed similar packages elsewhere can enlighten us on this? So far as I know, it's difficult, but perhaps not impossible, to find deals which provide a reasonably high salary, paid accommodation, health insurance, long holidays, kids' education and annual flights for both the employee and his/her dependents. There may be a few places - perhaps in the Far East - which provide such comprehensive packages but my suspicion is that they are few and far between.
Also, you need to bear in mind that for many people here, the choice is not between teaching school at home and teaching ESL in the Gulf, but between the Gulf and some other ESL destination. Many, maybe most, ESL teachers here are not trained to teach in schools in their native countries and have chosen to specialize in ESL, perhaps taking a relevant masters' degree. Certainly, opportunities in the ESL field are very poor in most English speaking countries - you would be doing very well to get a contract (as opposed to hourly work) at all, let alone one with anything like the benefits obtainable here. So, for these people - such as myself - the Gulf is the best place to be from a financial standpoint. The free housing is only one part of this, but it is an important part. |
I'm in a similar position. I have the right qualifications for college and university jobs in the US, but 90% of them are part-time, and one full-time university job that I saw offered... gasp... $22,000! (I could make more at Starbucks!) Now, me being single, there is nooooo way I can afford to buy a house on that salary, on top of paying off my debts. Given that I do not (and for the near future cannot) own my own house, rent would be my biggest expense. Not having to pay it is a HUGE advantage. If there were other countries out there that offered similar packages to what I am currently getting, I'd go there, but there really aren't.
I thought about getting into K-12 teaching for the job security and higher salaries, but I'm really not interested in K-12 teaching. Nor am I interested in living in those parts of the US in which I could afford to buy a house on a single ESL teacher's salary. Nope. Instead, my plan is to save up for a couple more years in the Gulf so that I have enough to fall back on and pay my bills when I re-enter the part-time ESL job market in the US.
d |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van Norden
Joined: 23 Oct 2004
Posts: 409
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:06 pm Post subject: Re: Free housing, free housing, free housing. So is it worth |
|
|
| globalnomad2 wrote: |
| Furthermore, if I have paid off my house as quickly as possible and thus minimized the interest payments, I have in essence made the payments to myself, now I own the house, so in that sense it is actually "free housing." Not completely...but in some sense it is. |
No, you've made the payments to a large multi-national financial organization! Paying your mortgage is just another form of rent: you are renting their money.
Sorry to be a bore, but just to go back a bit:
| globalnomad2 wrote: |
| Statistics show that 40% of homeowners in the US own their homes outright. That means many, many schoolteachers have, in effect, free housing in their home country. |
This is a fallacy. It isn't really "free" housing. They've got capital tied up in that house and they're not getting any income from it. There's an opportunity cost. I know it's pedantic but I feel the need to point that out. Remember: "there's no such thing as a free lunch." Shady characters like our Transylvanian interloper will try to tell you otherwise 
Incidentally, my point about home ownership was originally in response to Cleo's post about renting out your own home. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
globalnomad2
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know...but when you've minimized interest payments and paid off the house, you retain the value of most of the cash you've paid--now in brick and mortar that will eventually even go up in value, present times in the US notwithstanding. You can sell it later for a net gain (one hopes), use it for collateral, or live in it. Not that it's the world's best investment, but it can be useful.
Again, a simple point that Van actually agreed with:
(a) I'm Joe Sixpack earning $3000 a month and paying $800 in rent...plus the usual taxes. I'm not crazy about the Middle East. But does it behoove me to consider a Gulf package with $3500 net income and no rent? Certainly.
(b) I'm Joe Sixpack earning $3000 a month and paying $1000 a month in mortgage. Does it behoove me to rent out my house for $1100 and take a Gulf package with $3500 net income? Absolutely, if I want to get ahead.
(b) I'm Joe Sixpack earning $3000 a month but I own my house outright. As I'm not a big fan of living in the Middle East, do I prefer to scrape by at home? Most likely. Since I've already done enough traveling for three lifetimes! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hope Joe Sixpack ain't tryin' ta teach English  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
globalnomad2
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Enlighten me about errors in my last post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sheikh radlinrol
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Posts: 1222
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| globalnomad2 wrote: |
| Enlighten me about errors in my last post. |
Only one as far as I can see. ''Behove'' is spelt with one O. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sheikh radlinrol
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Posts: 1222
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="sheikh radlinrol"]
| globalnomad2 wrote: |
| Enlighten me about errors in my last post. |
Only one as far as I can see. ''Behove'' is spelt with one O.[/quote
Sorry! UK spelling behove, USA behoove. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uaeobserver
Joined: 05 Feb 2007
Posts: 236
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I pick my place of employment based upon my long-term career objectives.
One of my objectives was to work and live overseas. The UAE helped me meet that objective, and also helped me meet my objective of building a better nest egg.
"Free housing" is a nice perk. So is "tax free income." These two benefits combined make my pay go a lot farther than it would go state-side.
I don't think it's particularly wise to move to the Muddle East solely to enjoy the free housing. It's nice --- but certainly not a be-all-end-all perk.
Examine your goals and objectives. If the UAE or the Arabian region is consistent with those goals and objectives -- join us! If your only goal is financial success ---- you might consider looking elsewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
globalnomad, I wasn't poking at your post. I was having visions of the "Joe Sixpacks" I've personally encountered in my life, and hoping that none of those guys are trying to teach English.
Not your language use, just the images the appellation brings to mind!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miski2
Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 52
Location: Kuwait
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scot47
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Posts: 15343
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Where I am it is easier to pick up Filipinos ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bebsi
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 958
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What's this, VN, about "Transylvanian interlopers"?
What do you mean by an opportunity cost? Do you mean that instead of paying a mortgage, one could be buying stocks and shares????
If so, you really are obsessed with the market, old boy. Most people pay mortgages because they cannot afford to buy a house outright. Most people buy a house because they need somewhere to live. [I know, in certain countries such as Germany, many are happy to live their lives in rented accommodation, although that is now changing fast, with large numbers of owner-occupiers entering the new-housing-developments market there.] If you need a place to live and you make regular payments towards that residential property, you are increasing your equity all the time, and eventually you end up with a substantial asset.
By paying rent, you are simply paying towards the use of a property for a finite period of time. The value you receive is far less in real terms.
In many cases, a mortgage actually works out cheaper than renting, and depending on where you are, you can claim substantial mortgage-interest-relief from tax.
In addition, most people would prefer to pay into real-estate than to invest in the stock market for two significant reasons: they know very little about the markets, and see it as a very complex area, and also, they regard it as downright safer.
OK, VN, let's not get into that whole argument again; suffice to say that readers can visit that other thread (I'm too tired now to even bother checking what it was called  ) and read the arguments for themselves.
I will conclude here by saying that I've never met anyone who regretted buying their house via a mortgage as opposed to renting all their lives.
BTW, does anyone out there want to buy a medieval castle (in Transylvania, as it happens) for a trifling million euro (USD 1.3M, GBP 0.7M) negotiable. It even has resident bats....and a nice deep abyss at one side, by which unwelcome visitors could be made to exit expediently!! 
No mortgages available for it, tho!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van Norden
Joined: 23 Oct 2004
Posts: 409
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeh Bebsi, let's not get into trench warfare again! That was ugly.
Opportunity cost = the cost of alternative options. You can either live in your house or rent it out. If you live in it you forgo rental income. So, living in your own home isn't really free. This is simple economic theory.
Of course, ultimately you have to live somewhere. The trick is to minimize the opportunity cost (the definition of economic efficiency.) For example, if you've done well in the recent property boom and you're now sitting on a large asset, you need to ask yourself: Is it too costly to live in my own home?
Personally, I'd rather have my wealth in shares and (for accommodation) rent/camp/squat as cheaply as possible. I can always access my wealth with ease, through dividends and partial sales of shares.
This preference of mine is based on convenience / lifestyle (I'm a nomad) as well as hard-headed economics. I think I'll be better off this way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bebsi
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 958
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Yeh Bebsi, let's not get into trench warfare again! That was ugly. |
Well, VN, Trench warfare really only gets nasty when one goes over the top!!!! 
| Quote: |
| Opportunity cost = the cost of alternative options. You can either live in your house or rent it out. If you live in it you forgo rental income. So, living in your own home isn't really free. This is simple economic theory. |
Ah, OK, all is now clearer. I completely agree with this, in fact.
| Quote: |
| Of course, ultimately you have to live somewhere. The trick is to minimize the opportunity cost (the definition of economic efficiency.) For example, if you've done well in the recent property boom and you're now sitting on a large asset, you need to ask yourself: Is it too costly to live in my own home? |
As I do with this. Thus, if you own a stately mansion in Scotland which some tycoon wants to rent out long-term for 8k a month, but you live alone and could rent a comfortable place for 500, the real cost of living in your stately pile is 7.5k. Makes sense really.
| Quote: |
Personally, I'd rather have my wealth in shares and (for accommodation) rent/camp/squat as cheaply as possible. I can always access my wealth with ease, through dividends and partial sales of shares.
This preference of mine is based on convenience / lifestyle (I'm a nomad) as well as hard-headed economics. I think I'll be better off this way. |
All a matter of personal preference, VN.
Basically, if you own a house and you are in the Gulf getting free accom, this frees up your asset to create further wealth, i.e. rental income. If you need somewhere to store your things, for example, and you can get $1,000 in rent for your house, while warehouse space would cost you only 100, it would thus make more sense to let it out and use a warehouse. Otherwise you are not getting free storage, you are in fact losing 900 a month.
So, at last VN we agree on something. We could team up, Bebsi Van Norden Consultants, you take the stock investments area and I will handle the real-estate division.
On a more serious note, when it comes to stocks -v- property, we all know that it is a combination of both that makes the best sense.
Now, anyone interested in that castle? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
