Divorce corp

[kev374]

[quote=6packscaredy]The courts can force a divorced wage earner to work or be thrown in jail for contempt. It’s not slavery. It’s the way it works. The system…[/quote]

Which is why the system sucks and more men are realizing this everyday. So let’s take an example situation.

Both husband and wife are in their early 60s when they divorce. They have been married 20 years, wife was stay at home for the last 20 years. Both had planned to retire between 60 and 65. Now, say the marital assets are around $300,000, each gets $150k.

Wife decides to take the $150k and retire, Husband wishes to do the same. So, are you telling me that the wife can do this and not only does she get to retire but a court will force the husband to continue busting his ass for the next 10, 15 or 20 years to pay her alimony while she is sipping margaritas in Cancun? Are you f-cking kidding me??

A lot is made about the sacrifices a woman makes by giving up her career and maintaining the household but what is often not said is that many women enjoy a much upgraded lifestyle throughout the marriage that they would never have access to on their own, they get a marital settlement that puts them way ahead of the savings they would’ve achieved on their own and that is not enough for them? They still want to continue getting support?

I can understand alimony in very limited cases where the wife will be jobless and destitute, but if there are substantial marital assets and the wife is healthy then not a cent of alimony needs to be awarded regardless of the length of the marriage.

Giving alimony to someone who gets $150-200k cash in a marital settlement is obscene, many people don’t even have that kind of money period!

Which is why I like the system in Texas – it’s a very anti-alimony state. Alimony in Texas is extremely hard to get in the first place… and IF a decision about alimony is made it is mandated by law that alimony cannot exceed 3 years. That is the absolute maximum. Love it!

Nobody wants to divorce and not be able to move on with their life or worse get into a situation of indentured servitude where some judge says you HAVE to work or will be thrown in jail… that is an extremely bad situation to find yourself in and it’s a risk only a fool would take.

[UCGal]

[quote=kev374][quote=6packscaredy]The courts can force a divorced wage earner to work or be thrown in jail for contempt. It’s not slavery. It’s the way it works. The system…[/quote]

Which is why the system sucks and more men are realizing this everyday. So let’s take an example situation.

Both husband and wife are in their early 60s when they divorce. They have been married 20 years, wife was stay at home for the last 20 years. Both had planned to retire between 60 and 65. Now, say the marital assets are around $300,000, each gets $150k.

Wife decides to take the $150k and retire, Husband wishes to do the same. So, are you telling me that the wife can do this and not only does she get to retire but a court will force the husband to continue busting his ass for the next 10, 15 or 20 years to pay her alimony while she is sipping margaritas in Cancun? Are you f-cking kidding me??

A lot is made about the sacrifices a woman makes by giving up her career and maintaining the household but what is often not said is that many women enjoy a much upgraded lifestyle throughout the marriage that they would never have access to on their own, they get a marital settlement that puts them way ahead of the savings they would’ve achieved on their own and that is not enough for them? They still want to continue getting support?

I can understand alimony in very limited cases where the wife will be jobless and destitute, but if there are substantial marital assets and the wife is healthy then not a cent of alimony needs to be awarded regardless of the length of the marriage.

Giving alimony to someone who gets $150-200k cash in a marital settlement is obscene, many people don’t even have that kind of money period![/quote]

In your scenario – I presume the wife worked before they got married – otherwise how did she survive to age 40?

I rarely see alimony for more than 5 years. And women usually end up financially worse off after divorce – so I don’t see it as a lucrative career choice… (career choice being SAHM then alimony.)

In your scenario also – they both would likely have to work… Neither qualifies for SS yet, and $150k will not get you very far. The wife would qualify for SS on her husbands record when she hits 62, unless she remarries, since she was married to him for more than 10 years.

Your hypothetical scenario is bogus and full of holes. Neither party is retiring.

[UCGal]

Kev –

Reading this thread and the breaking up thread… I think you’d be wise to have a prenup with any future potential bride. The prenup would take away your financial fears that your bride is out to get your assets.

You seem to assume all women are gold diggers and have enough anger about it that I would guess you’d be unsuccessful at marriage.

FWIW – my BFF had to pay her ex a lump sum alimony payment. It totally sucked for her because she lost her job in the dot.com bust right before it was due (18 months after the dissolution.) So alimony goes both ways.

[kev374]

[quote=UCGal]
You seem to assume all women are gold diggers and have enough anger about it that I would guess you’d be unsuccessful at marriage. [/quote]

sorry I came across to you as someone who assumes all women are gold diggers, I hardly think that. I have met some wonderful women in my life but they were hard to find!!

I do think that there are a disproportionately large number of gold digging materialistic women where I live (Orange County, California) and that may be heavily coloring my opinion. If I had a nickel for every woman I met that was self-absorbed with a “I am a princess” mentality I would be rich!!

I have also met a HUGE number of men who were embattled in bitter divorces where the woman stopped at nothing to clean them out and were particularly vindictive.

[scaredyclassic]

Lifetime alimony potential exists in many states.

only a few states have outlawed it.

You may get married in calif. but can you be certain you’ll be divorced here?

[FlyerInHi]

Blogstar, I think a guy can make is at a homemaker, if circumstances make it work. Sure, friends and family would be supportive.

Yeah, if a guy says that one is his interests is homemaking, that would get him some good dates.

But do we raise boys to be homemakers? Can boys grow up and dream of being homemakers just like girls do? It’s very rare that a man begins his adult life with the explicit goal of being a homemaker. For that vision to work, people have to adjust their attitudes, or start with a blank slate.

I wasn’t serious when I said I want a wife to buy me a Manhattan apartment. But why not? The response is probably an eyeroll or “in your dreams only”. But women say such things all time. And they get it.

Ideally, people can do whatever they want and no one should judge. But in reality, people don’t want to be judged, but they easily assume that such a person is a certain way because of …..

[NotCranky]

Man am I glad you are joking. I personally wouldn’t get hung up on what a lot of women want and do that is counter to your sensibilities. That’s like women being sure you are going to beat them one day because more men beat and kill women.

I don’t think we raise boys to be homemakers, nor should we. I think we should raise boys and girls to have a broad array of choices to go with their personalities and to be somewhat comfortable negotiating life, including how homes are made, to the best of their abilities in cooperation with others ,not as paranoid adversaries. I know there is some natural adversary stuff in the sexes but people get carried away.

I know about all of those assumptions… People make assumptions about very intelligent liberal men who make a good living, are reasonably well off , are rarely if ever in a relationship, and have dogs…
Anyway, we know people will judge…I think the ones that are most judgmental are pretty trapped somehow. Like the Mexican men that are paranoid about being mandilon while their wives dominate them. We have that too…pretty neurotic attachment to gender roles in a culture that doesn’t need it.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=CA renter]Which brings me to my next question…

If SAH spouses and alimony awards are “relics from days gone by” and no longer appropriate, would you agree that the tradition of a woman taking a man’s name and naming her children after him is equally inappropriate? After all, these traditions are carried forward from times when women and their children were the property of men. There is far less justification for this tradition than for alimony awards for SAHPs.[/quote]

I couldn’t give a rat’s ass if my kids didn’t have my name. That custom is a relic.
If I get married, I will marry up the class ladder, not down, so the mom’s name would probably go farther.

I like how the Spanish hyphenate names.

CAr, you like to point to Europe as an example. Did look at their attitudes regarding sex and marriage?

As far as our system here, it is what it is. People go in with their eyes wide open. I don’t have much sympathy if things don’t work out and they feel screwed.[/quote]

For both men and women, right? After all, it’s not only SAHMs who feel like victims. The most vociferous whiner-victims are men who know full well about divorce, alimony, and child support before getting married, but try to play the victim card when they find themselves in that situation.

[CDMA ENG]

UCgal,

I don’t get it. You home school but they are attending classes as well?

Can you elaborate on the schooling situation?

CE

[joec]

kev, how old are you btw? +/- a few years is fine…What I’ve noticed is that as we get older, I think guys get more concerned with this whole marriage/finance thing and when 40+ comes around, they are probably too worried to bother. Again, maybe it’s really just not the person you want to make all the sacrifices for, but that’s what I’ve seen with some co-workers in that age bracket…

I think the Orange County/LA area IS very different too. For people who have lived/worked there, I think it’s much more superficial than say SD or the bay area.

It’s nice Blogstar that things are working out great, but I think it’s because you found a great spouse able to ignore the comments/society/etc…

Like some other people have posted, it’s very ok for society in general to not look down for woman who want to get married and have kids, but the opposite isn’t as true for the guy. It’s just how society currently is.

This will change in time, but it’s really not there yet.

In the end, I think many people should probably just stay single…Maybe there’d be less divorce then to begin with…

[FlyerInHi]

Blog star, absolutely, people should have an array of choices to do what makes them happy.

You’re thinking self-fulfillment on an individual and family level. I’m thinking society in general, and policies and laws concerning marriage.

I believe a large number of women (more like a majority) want to be sahp and they want protection. It’s not really about equality in that men can do it too. Men who go about becoming homemakers and seeking provider spouses the same way women do will never make it.

[scaredyclassic]

proposal a marriage tax credit…

it’s always bugged the crap out of me that i pay more in taxes simply because we are married.

at one point i wanted to divorce on paper, and get a better tax situation.

wife wouldnt go for it.

but it is bs to penalize certain marrieds taxwise.

so…

what about a tax credit for being married.

would disincentivize divorce.

i think $4,200 credit might keep some marriages together…

might need a bit more for some couples.

[CA renter]

[quote=6packscaredy]

in my own personal, admittedly very limited experience,; kids really like to see their parents happy with each other. Not that that’s the only factor obviously. But they enjoy that a lot.so why be miserable. I think there’s always a way to get back to happiness if things don’t get too far off track. Moods change. Accept and tolerate.[/quote]

No doubt about that. Kids love to see their parents being loving toward one another. But I think that the choice outlined by SK is this: unhappily married parents in an intact home, OR divorced parents. Unless there is extreme abuse and/or constant, violent rages happening on a regular basis, I just don’t see how children would choose to live in a divorced family situation in most cases.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]kev, how old are you btw? +/- a few years is fine…What I’ve noticed is that as we get older, I think guys get more concerned with this whole marriage/finance thing and when 40+ comes around, they are probably too worried to bother. Again, maybe it’s really just not the person you want to make all the sacrifices for, but that’s what I’ve seen with some co-workers in that age bracket…

I think the Orange County/LA area IS very different too. For people who have lived/worked there, I think it’s much more superficial than say SD or the bay area.

[/quote]

You should also consider, Kev, what you are trying to attract and what you find attractive. If you’re looking for the super-hot chick with the perfect hair, nails, and figure…who goes to the gym 5X week to look hot (not primarily for health), perhaps YOU are the one who needs to re-assess things.

You might want to consider a girl who is a little less “hot” (read: high-maintenance), and try dating more down-to-earth girls with good personalities. IMHO, they make better wives and are far more likely to treat you well and stay loyal to you for the rest of your life (which should absolutely be your goal if you’re planning to marry…or you’ll end up one of those bitter divorced dudes who can’t stop whining about alimony/child support, etc.).

[NotCranky]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Blog star, absolutely, people should have an array of choices to do what makes them happy.

You’re thinking self-fulfillment on an individual and family level. I’m thinking society in general, and policies and laws concerning marriage.

I believe a large number of women (more like a majority) want to be sahp and they want protection. It’s not really about equality in that men can do it too. Men who go about becoming homemakers and seeking provider spouses the same way women do will never make it.[/quote]
i

[Author]

Posts