emmjay wrote:
> Spain and/or Northern Ireland (probably a split between the two).

Northern Ireland is an unusual retirement destination for non-Brits, but I'm sure it has its appeals.
I still want to do an Ireland + Northern Ireland trip someday. Tbh, in Northern Ireland, the only sights I know I want to visit are the Giant's Causeway and Belfast, although likely there's much more to see and do.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Heliotrope
>
> The OP can form a TW Representative Office, and employ themselves as the
> manager and agent. The capital requirement is about USD$16,000 and thats
> capital invested not costs. Representative Offices are not permitted to
> generate profits or engage in sales, so theres no tax liability or expected
> profit and losses to be filed. The OP can live off their retirement,
> participate in NHI, and after five years apply for PR (APRC), and thats
> real retirement, aside from filing and maintaining documents they dont have
> to 'work'.
>
> I know three ITs that applied for the Gold card one was granted it, one was
> denied and one withdrew their application (the application could have gone
> either way). The one that was granted it had an M.Ed from a very average
> university, and a credential, but they did have the CSML (Certificate in
> School Management and Leadership) from Harvard, even though they were a
> classroom IT and not in leadership.
>
> I have nothing against TW, it has its pluses and minuses, just that there
> are plenty of good reasons and for some factors better reasons (and worst)
> for other regions as well. TW just isnt the gold ring across all
> categories.

I know that initially the Gold Card program wasn't having the effect the Taiwanese government was hoping for (in terms of numbers), so maybe they've become less strict about qualifications and a little less strict with seniority. Numbers are better lately though. The good thing for applicants is that it's qualification-based, not proposal-based, so you don't have to sell them on your plans.
Do you know why the teacher who was denied was not approved? I assume they had lesser qualifications?

I'd say Taiwan has mostly pluses, and only a few minuses. It beats most, if not all countries in the region IMO, but different people will weigh different factors differently.
Likely some people will discount it based on China's increasingly louder sabre-rattling alone, and I know someone who just can't deal with the uncertainty that comes with being on multiple active fault lines (but somehow still chose to live in both Tokyo and Taipei before this realization).
For some people language could be another minus, especially with it being a non-Latin script.
All of those wouldn't really keep me from retiring in Taiwan. There are just a lot of pluses: it's is generally very well-organized and low in corruption, and it’s widely considered one of the easiest and safest places in Asia (you can walk anywhere at night with almost zero chance of incidents). Rule of law is also a plus, and most public services are efficient, reliable and accessible, with health care and transportation both being really great. Cost of living is obviously higher than rural Southeast Asia, but it's still significantly cheaper than Western Europe or the US. And the Taiwanese people are some of the friendliest I've encountered while travelling the globe, and in Taipei and some of the other bigger cities lots of people will speak decent English.

That being said, many countries are appealing. It would be hard to choose just one, but luckily we don't necessarily have to.

PsyGuy wrote:
> Thats a very American concentric position @kfssbjj. There are plenty of
> regions (E.G. the EUR) that provide a social pension scheme. Further, your
> not required (at least in regards to state DE pension schemes) to work the
> entirety of your life within the US DE system to become vested in those
> retirement plans, allowing plenty of opportunity to transition into DE.
>
> TW ranks first on some reports, but there are other indices that place
> other countries ahead of Taiwan (E.G. AUS in one, Norway in another), the
> difference between them varies by about 1% or less among the commonly cited
> sources. TW is consistent for ranking high but its by no means an outlier.
> There are numerous locations with high quality health care.
>
> I dont disagree with @Heliotrope in the locus of his claims. TW doesnt have
> an easy retirement visa compared to the ones cited. That is more
> problematic, but its not a critical flaw.
> First, TW does have a "Gold card" visa, it allows residency and
> participation in the TW NHI (among other benefits) and isnt tied to a
> particular employer. It is however restricted to those who are in
> specialist fields, but edu is one of them.
> Second, the most common method is starting a business in TW or opening a
> rep office of an existing business in TW. This allows you to employ
> yourself as the designated agent and participate in NHI. The requirements
> arent arduous either, an online tutoring company would be sufficient and
> since your income would be entirely retirement you woudnt run afoul of any
> profit or sales restrictions.
> Third, semi or pseudo retirement is also an easy possibility. There a very
> high demand for ETs in the ESOL field. You could have a job with the 15hrs.
> minimum at some ES within a week or so of job searching in TW. Recruitment
> agencies in TW are constantly recruiting with high demand (though it
> fluctuates) year round. This would allow you to participate in NHI with a
> minimal time commitment.

I'm was going by his plan, which was work in the US and then stop working and retire in Taiwan, but if you instead work there for 5 years, you can indeed obtain permanent residency. And you're right: it doesn't have to be full time work.
I wouldn't try the Gold Card route though: while it does include education, it's not meant for your typical teacher (I know someone who tried and failed). Apparently (for edu) it's meant to attract university lecturers, school leaders, senior curriculum designers, published authors and senior trainers. But if @kfssbjj happens to be any of those, it's a viable route to permanent residency. It's renewed every three years, so if they renew you once you'll be eligible for the APRC after a total of five years.

I know two teachers who are planning to try to have their last teaching post be in Taiwan, so they will qualify for permanent residency just before they retire.

Not sure if Taiwan's healthcare system will still be as great 10+ years from now, as Taiwan is on the threshold of being a super-aged society, which will make it increasingly harder to finance and staff. But for now it is still pretty great compared to almost all other countries (indeed some countries are just as good or even better), and Taiwan is an attractive place to live for plenty of other reasons.

kfssbjj wrote:
> Working overseas is a waste as you do not build state or social security
> benefits. I would rather work in the US and retire in Taiwan as they have
> the best medical system in the world.

First of all, if you think teaching overseas is a waste, perhaps you joined the wrong forum?
And speaking for myself, the increased savings potential that working overseas has afforded me not only grants me a very comfortable lifestyle with lots of travel while working, but has also allowed me to build a sizeable investment account that will yield significantly more purchasing power in retirement than I would have had if I hadn't left.

I do agree that financially it's not the best move for every international teacher (many don't start saving for retirement until it's too late), but plenty of them make it work.
And of course money isn't the only reason why international teachers decide to go abroad. Some just want to escape domestic education, and some want to live abroad and experience different cultures.

Secondly, while Taiwan would be great country to spend retirement, it does not have a designated retirement/residence visa for retirees based solely on age and financial means, like (for example) Malaysia. This means you can’t just declare "I’m retired" and get a retirement visa to live in Taiwan indefinitely without fitting an existing visa category. Most foreign retirees in Taiwan are either married to a Taiwanese spouse or have an APRC after living in Taiwan (on a work or spousal visa) for 5 years.
You can instead do repeated tourist visas or visa-free entries, typically up to 90 days at a time. For this you'll have to leave and re-enter to reset the clock every three months, but this isn’t permanent residence, so it won't make you eligible for the Taiwanese national healthcare insurance.

Spain and Portugal are both great countries.
I wouldn't mind living in either Lisbon, Porto, Madrid, Sevilla or Valencia, or perhaps smaller cities like Coimbra, Zaragoza, Braga or Bilbao.
The Azores (Portuguese archipelago in the mid-Atlantic) also look amazing, although perhaps too remote for my liking.
I already speak Spanish, so Spain might be the easier choice of the two. Lisbon does look like the nicest city of the bunch, but all seem really great, with Valencia being the runner-up for the top spot.

But while both Spain and Portugal are now relatively easy countries to retire in, the quality of healthcare, COL and the ease of getting a visa might be very different by the time I retire. Also, the Summers in Spain (and I assume Portugal) are already brutally hot at times, and might be a lot harder to endure in a decade or two.
Even though I like to plan ahead, sadly I'll have to wait and see what the world looks like when I'm closer to retirement, but both Spain and Portugal are definitely countries I'll keep an eye on. It's really sad that neither countries has great international schools with a decent savings potential.

Yes

PsyGuy wrote:
> Its an accurate and reliable theory and model

Not according to an overwhelming majority of the leading affective neuroscientists, emotion researchers and cognitive neuroscientists. But hey, maybe you know more about this than they do. I certainly don't, so feel free to take it up with them if you want to dispute the current consensus. Or take it up with the billions of people who have felt happiness and sadness simultaneously about the same event because they arise from different appraisals and interpretations made by the brain.

Yes, you have a theory, but your theory and model is outdated and has been deemed incorrect by basically all experts in the field.
I appreciate that this was possibly the leading theory when you were in university, but science advances and they now have a much more correct and more complete understanding of how emotions work.
Post your theory in a forum for affective neuroscientists and see what all of them will say. You'd be classified as a dinosaur.
So we indeed disagree that this teacher who was or was not wrongfully detained in Russia 2021.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Heliotrope
>
> You neither represent all experts, nor would ALL of them agree with
> @Heliotrope.
>
> We disagree.

There is no 'representative of all experts', and if there was, it wouldn't be an international teacher now, would it?.
I merely informed you of the consensus amongst experts.
You're welcome to be a non-expert who disagrees, just as I'm a non-expert who happily defers to the consensus of experts.

PsyGuy wrote:
> As long as you include the USA in world wide coverage than it is indeed
> rare to find.

Yes, lots of T1 schools have policies that cover the entire world minus the USA. Definitely not all schools known as T1 cover the entire world.
My current school does cover the US, but if I remember correctly none of my previous schools did.

What you're describing is outdated, and all experts would disagree with you.
According to them, happiness and sadness are different emotions, and you can experience both at the same time about the same event.

PsyGuy wrote:
> Those arent different emotions. They are the polar ends of one emotion,
> well being. One end being happiness and the other end being sadness. A
> negative event would reduce the happiness of a positive event (or inverse a
> positive event would improve the negative event). They arent experienced
> separately.

What you're describing is known as the hedonic “single-axis” theory, a simplistic early model that viewed emotions as one-dimensional: pleasant vs. unpleasant. This outdated model fails to capture the complexity of simultaneous or conflicting emotions, and doesn’t match how emotions are observed to actually work.

According to current psychological understanding, emotions are multidimensional, not just one axis, and people can experience affective ambivalence, or "mixed emotions". Brain imaging and physiological data also show distinct neural patterns for emotions like anger and sadness, even when they occur at the same time. So feeling both joy and sadness, or relief and grief, separately at the same time are psychologically realistic and empirically supported.

Sometimes I reply because I think some people reading your reply might see the many holes in your many arguments (I know, I'm very likely underestimating the readership of this forum), but in this case I'm pretty sure everyone will. Saves me the trouble of replying in length.

So I'll keep it short:
Yes, we disagree.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Heliotrope
>
> Neither of your scenarios are about different things, they are about
> related "things". Youre rationalizing that they are.

You're welcome to call them related.
Still, you've never had two different emotions about two different aspects of the same event?

Can you perhaps imagine being happy so many friends showing up for little PsyGuy's 7th birthday ., but also sad your best friend Timmy wasn't able to make it due to a cold?
If your family home was struck by an earthquake while you were out, killing most of your family, would you not still be happy if you unexpectedly found one them still alive under the rubble, while also being sad that the rest didn't make it?
If you found out you overpaid for a painting and were mad about that, would you really be unable to still appreciate it's beauty?

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Heliotrope
>
> The rationalization that both are attainable given real world contexts.
> Youll dismiss it by claiming youre capable of forming and holding contrary
> thoughts and feelings at the same time. Ill counter that process is called
> rationalization. You will retort that it isnt, I will respond with a meme
> of dismissiveness while reasserting that it is, and which will then repeat
> in cycle until one of us ceases; upon which the last poster will mentally
> declare victory. Which should not be unexpected by either of us.

Those two feelings aren’t contrary, because they’re about different things. I can be unhappy about the prisoner swap, and at the same time relieved that he’s finally home with his family. Sure, a good outcome depends on a bad event — but that doesn’t make the emotions contradictory.
If my father passed away and left me his car right after mine broke down, I could feel both grief over his death and relief that he left me the car instead of his wine collection. Those two emotions would be directed at different aspects of the same event.