The IRS has a calculator that can help you figure it out: http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/IRS-Withholding-Calculator

What's the actual error message?

Anonymous wrote:I've done a lot of research and came up with a reasonable range but more information can't hurt in preparation

And you think any information you get on this forum from the vague question above will be more useful than your own research? More information can hurt if you don't filter your sources. You want more GOOD information, and this is not a valid way to get it. If you've got a reasonable range based on relevant research, then go with that. You'd need to provide a lot more information here than most people would want to post to get anything useful.

Anonymous wrote:My neighbort said it was due to sequestration.

More than likely, either the contract they were working on expired or else they lost a re-compete bid. They may blame sequestration for not getting a new contract or winning the re-bid, but that doesn't mean it is the actual cause.

Anonymous wrote:What is the fee range in this region for consulting by someone that has a higher degree, in an intellectual field (like JD, MD, PhD etc).

It depends entirely on the field, supply and demand, and what prices you think you can command. Seriously, if you don't even know what reasonable rates are for your field, you need to do more research before starting your business.

I seriously doubt being Mormon impacted his voting base. There are definitely some idiot Republicans out there that didn't want to vote for him simply because he is Mormon, but they still embraced him fervently when the alternative was four more years of the "evil Muslim Communist" president they were trying to defeat. The votes that swung the election didn't care about religion either way.

Boeing's layoffs have nothing to do with the fiscal cliff, and I doubt the SAIC layoffs mentioned above were related to it either.(Contracts end all the time, resulting in layoffs) As for my bet on defense jobs in the DC area, I'd say the difference between now and six months from now will be negligible. Some cuts will be made, other areas will continue to grow, and overall defense spending in this area won't change much.

To clarify what I said above, certifications are likely to be more valuable in your current position and in seeking equivalent positions at other companies. However, if you eventually plan to move up to management, then the Masters will likely be more useful in making that move.

I'm a big proponent of education, and I think it would probably be worth it. If you can get the company you work for to pay for at least a decent chunk of it, then there's really no financial reason not to pursue it.(My company picked up the cost of my Masters, so I'd have been foolish not to take advantage of it) If you don't have any kind of help with tuition, then it becomes a tougher choice that depends much more on your particular field of work as well as the cost of the program. In general, relevant and higher degrees are always better looking on a resume(Yes, there can be overkill, but not likely at the Masters level) and may give you a leg up on the competition if all other aspects are equal(Experience in particular) I look at it this way: Earning your Masters degree won't hurt beyond the cost of tuition and time, but it may help your career in the long run. If you think the cost is worth it, either for future benefit or just personal satisfaction, then go for it.

Edit: I got my Masters in Computer Science from GMU, and I think it was worth it just to increase my marketability. I had the experience as well, but every little bit helps, particularly when it comes to getting the attention of potential employers. There are several other good programs from the area schools, so I would go with the one that is the best fit for you personally.

Anonymous wrote:Did you read the article on the flu vaccine in today's NYT? It says flu vaccines are basically worthless, but are a marketing bonanza, making billions of dollars for the makers of the vaccines.

From the NYT blog with the article I assume you were referring to: "“I say, ‘Use this vaccine,’ ” he said." That was a quote from the doctor who's study found that the vaccine was not as effective as many believed, although it was primarily in elderly patients that the effectiveness was not present. It mentions modest protection for healthy adults, but does not mention the results in children at all. Even his study showed that it provided some protection to normal age adults. And he stressed that there were no safety issues with getting the vaccine and still encouraged their use, along with further study and development of more effective vaccines. While he does state part of what you implied above, in no way does it state that flu vaccines are worthless. He just advocates for further research and development. The only way to interpret it the way you did is if you already had a bias about "useless chemicals" being injected into people.

For those who don't want to read the entire article reference above, the short version is "Flu vaccines may not be as effective as advertised, but they don't hurt."

I'll add my recommendation for running as well. I started with the Couch to 5K program back in May, and even though I had never been a runner before, I am now. My success with the running prompted me to add other exercises(On days when I wasn't running), and it also helped motivate me to stick to other diet changes. Like others said, don't expect rapid weight loss at first. You may be losing weight, but you are also building up muscle at the same time. Eventually, the weight loss will speed up, but you'll feel the effects of the exercise long before that happens. Good effects, I mean

Anonymous wrote:How about Little Lords and Ladies?

http://www.littlelordsandladies.com/Little_Lords_and_Ladies/Welcome.html

+1. My wife had to stop going because she was having a hard time resisting the urge to buy more clothes there.(And this was before our daughter was even born)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like Java Green, but I don't have too much sympathy for businesses that don't pay their taxes. The tax would be on the profit *after* paying employee payroll, so it really shouldn't impact their weekly payroll if they were planning ahead.

Their taxes should be on all sales rung up.

But would expenses (payroll, overhead, etc.) be deducted from the sales tax at the end of the year?

No, these are two entirely different sets of taxes. A sales tax is imposed on just that, sales. That amount is charged on top of the cost of the products sold and goes straight to the entity imposing the tax.(This may be monthly, quarterly, whatever, but the business should never touch this money for their own purposes) Deductions, expenses, etc., are applied against income taxes to determine if you actually owe taxes, and if so, how much, just like with your personal income taxes.

That being said, I don't think Java Green has good management, which would make me hesitant to support them. From the various articles I've read, they owe taxes dating back to 2010. They've nearly been evicted for non-payment of rent(No idea if they are current on rent now or not, but I don't consider it likely) and had issues with other bills. The businesses were for sale at one point, but I don't think there were any takers, which is another bad sign. It looks like taxes are only one part of their problem, and I would be very leery of where any money given to them will actually end up.

Anonymous wrote:Why on earth do we even need early voting?

People should vote on election day, not election month.

If you can't make it that day, send in an absentee ballot.

If it is important enough, you will find a way to vote.

For most heavily-populated areas, it is simply about the number of people voting. When everyone was voting on the same day, it meant larger crowds, long waits, etc. It also disproportionately affected poorer people, since they often literally could not afford to miss work to go vote.(What's more important, voting or paying the rent?) It also benefits senior citizens(Less time standing in line, more assistance available, easier to arrange transportation from nursing homes and assisted living facilities, etc.) as well as other groups that work to provide transportation to voters. Absentee ballots are the biggest source of voter fraud, so I don't think expanding their use is a good idea. In fact, I think that with the increase in early voting opportunities, absentee ballots should be much more restricted than they currently are. I don't see any logical justification for only allowing voting on one arbitrary day. There are multiple benefits to allowing early voting, which I think more than outweigh the costs.

As for the rationale for reducing them, the most frequent one I've seen is to give time for local election boards to prepare for the election. However, I think these types of decisions had been made at the local levels for years, allowing each election board to decide when they would be open for early voting, and it was only recently that the states decided to impose rules on when they could and could be open. I haven't seen any good justification as to why some states felt the need to take control of what had been decided locally.(Which makes sense, given the different situations local boards will face)

Anonymous wrote:You should check with HR but most places have a 30 day window after the birth of a child to get on the insurance. Most group plans that include maternity care include newborn coverage for 30 days after the birth, and in that time you contact your company and they put your baby on your plan.

Never hurts to check, but this is a fairly standard thing and it's not like babies are only born during open enrollment!

I've seen similar statements about newborn coverage for 30 days after birth, but from what I've read of most plans, that isn't entirely accurate. For every plan I've had, you have 30 days to add a newborn to an insurance plan, at which point they will be retroactively covered from birth. However, if you do not add them to the plan, then they get no coverage at all. That is very different from actual coverage for 30 days after birth. You should always check with your particular insurance plan to be sure of how it will work.

As for the actual question, I would contact your benefits people and discuss the options with them, since it really depends on how your plan is managed.