Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on May 30, 2020 9:40:25 GMT -5
Ask the people that lost half their assets in a divorce if they would do it all over again. I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t.
If your daughter married a low earned and had 5 kids she wouldn’t get a huge payout. I have a problem with divorce being a lottery. I think everyone needs to think very hard about protecting their assets before getting married. I To answer your question, no I do not think your daughter should get half of his assets if they divorced. He could have hired a nanny to take care of his kids while he worked, a cleaning lady to take care of the house, etc, without putting half of his assets at risk. Well, my Ex did. He even has a again SAHW now. I guess you could say he's stupid (and you probably are saying that), but it's a matter of priorities I guess. Money is not the be all end all to everyone. Why get married to someone that makes less than you? I guess you could just as well ask why have kids. They give absolutely nothing back financially and are huge money sucks. I'm thinking of my neighbors now. Married for 72 years and she never worked for money a day in her life, but a harder working woman I never met. He died of a broken heart a few weeks ago just 3 months after she died. I think he would have given every last dime he had to have her back. And they stayed married and that’s great for them. But when a marriage ends, it is awful that a person can be wiped out. I have some substantial assets now and my plan is to keep growing them. If my future husband wouldn’t sign off on any claim to what I earned, he would remain a boyfriend. Marriage is a legal contract that screws over a high earner in the event of a divorce. Otherwise, someone divorcing a rich person wouldn’t walk away with a windfall while someone married to a low earner doesn’t. Does a woman do less work as a SAHM if she married someone making $40k a year versus $400,000?
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on May 30, 2020 9:42:22 GMT -5
No... what you are saying is that NO ONE need a SAH anything. Talk for yourself all you want. Don't talk for everyone. Its not your job to pass judgement on everyone based on your criteria for assessing your own life choices.
Thought experiment. Are you suggesting you would have the same amount of money, be at the same place, have the same number of assets... if you never had to take care of your children, take a day off for them, cook a meal, do a load of laundry, mow the lawn... you would be at exactly the same place? Or you would have had the chance to increase your net worth significantly by being freed from all those tasks and that stress?
Sigh. I don't know why I bother. It really doesn't matter. The law recognizes the value of a spouse. The law recognizes that assets grown during a marriage are grown by both partners even if they have complimentary roles. That is all that matters.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 9:42:39 GMT -5
Well, if you're hiring out 30K/year in work instead of investing it...
According to my Phil Script, a yearly investment of $30,000.00 bearing an annual return of 11% could grow to $2,137,954.31 in 20 years!
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on May 30, 2020 9:44:24 GMT -5
But when a marriage ends, it is awful that a person can be wiped out. That is not at all what you've described. You are perfectly ok with one party being wiped out. As long as its the party you think is deserving of being wiped out.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,018
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on May 30, 2020 9:44:46 GMT -5
If you are married with non-working spouse - "your" money is your pay/2. That's just the way it goes. "your" part of your savings is total/2.
Similar for a lower-earning spouse.
Now come on ms tequila, you can't honestly think that a stay at home spouse should be flung out onto the street homeless and destitute after a divorce?
If a higher earner doesn't want to support or supplement someone who is not working/low earner - then don't get married or get divorced as soon as your expectations of the other's earnings is 'disappointed'. Split what is there and move on.
But don't stayed married for a long time and then expect that you get to keep everything just by calling it "yours". What is "ours" is only "ours" if the courts legally identify it as such. Our great ideas aren't even ours unless with have patent or a copywrite on it. If a court says marital assets are 50% of the account - that is what's "yours"
Think of a billion dollar idea at work - haha - you get nothing but your usual paycheck for it. That's because the company owns it not you. At least in a marriage - you are getting 50%.
Why anyone thinks they can weasel out of splitting assets in a divorce, it's just naive at best and cruel at worst, and just plain stupid in the middle.
If someone is truly a manipulative parasite during a marriage - take some responsibility for your own actions. You knew you were married, you knew the financial implications of that - every single day into month into year you stayed married. It's not like marriage is a fucking legal contract with lots of financial implications....oh - wait, it really is isn't it?
Pay your court-ordered stupid tax and move on. Get therapy if you need it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 9:49:05 GMT -5
Well, my Ex did. He even has a again SAHW now. I guess you could say he's stupid (and you probably are saying that), but it's a matter of priorities I guess. Money is not the be all end all to everyone. Why get married to someone that makes less than you? I guess you could just as well ask why have kids. They give absolutely nothing back financially and are huge money sucks. I'm thinking of my neighbors now. Married for 72 years and she never worked for money a day in her life, but a harder working woman I never met. He died of a broken heart a few weeks ago just 3 months after she died. I think he would have given every last dime he had to have her back. And they stayed married and that’s great for them. But when a marriage ends, it is awful that a person can be wiped out. I have some substantial assets now and my plan is to keep growing them. If my future husband wouldn’t sign off on any claim to what I earned, he would remain a boyfriend. Marriage is a legal contract that screws over a high earner in the event of a divorce. Otherwise, someone divorcing a rich person wouldn’t walk away with a windfall while someone married to a low earner doesn’t. Does a woman do less work as a SAHM if she married someone making $40k a year versus $400,000? Why ARE you getting married? Why not just keep him as an easily dumpable boyfriend? It's not financial as you both make the same and nobody needs insurance or a green card or anything. It's not religious because that's all "Onto thee, all my worldly possessions" and "better or worse", divorce not in the premarital planning thing. So, what is the draw for you?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 9:49:43 GMT -5
So the high-earners should only marry high earners? Really? My daughter and her husband have five kids ages 4-14. He's a lawyer and a politician; she is basically a stay-at-home mother who works 2 or 3 days a week (sometimes more) as a pharmacist. Are you trying to say that my daughter doesn't deserve half of their marital assets? Lol. That because the bigger paycheck has his name on it, it is his money? It wouldn't be that big if he had to devote 50% of his time taking care of the home and family. She certainly can and does support herself. This is not a model you would choose. We get that. But it doesn't mean that some women don't deserve half just because they didn't have as many zeroes on their pay stub. Ask the people that lost half their assets in a divorce if they would do it all over again. I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t. If your daughter married a low earned and had 5 kids she wouldn’t get a huge payout. I have a problem with divorce being a lottery. I think everyone needs to think very hard about protecting their assets before getting married. To answer your question, no I do not think your daughter should get half of his assets if they divorced. He could have hired a nanny to take care of his kids while he worked, a cleaning lady to take care of the house, etc, without putting half of his assets at risk. I did leave out half the equation. She didn't marry a high earner. They were two kids living on student loans while she went to pharmacy school and he went to law school. I think his student loans were actually larger than hers. There were no assets to protect before getting married. Anything and everything they have, they built together. They aren't his assets (or hers). They were acquired together. Fortunately, this is a non-issue. ETA: You mention "financial support." I'm not arguing for alimony. She is fully capable of supporting herself and even the 5 kids. My argument is that what they acquired together during the marriage is half hers.
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on May 30, 2020 9:52:06 GMT -5
Exactly... She had a business when they got married and he was a student still.
I was teaching when we got married... and he was in school, working part time.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on May 30, 2020 9:52:55 GMT -5
But when a marriage ends, it is awful that a person can be wiped out. That is not at all what you've described. You are perfectly ok with one party being wiped out. As long as its the party you think is deserving of being wiped out. Not true. I’m good with a person being compensated for the value of what they did. It should be calculated what it would have cost to hire out the job, then deduct 1/2 of all expenses over the same years. What’s left is what they are owed A person married to a guy making $40k isn’t going to walk away with a windfall. Are you saying the same woman doing the exact same thing but married to a guy making $400k a year suddenly brought more to the table? I actually see it the other way. I know a several women who never worked but married successful men. They had people come in to clean, do the landscaping, had “moms helper” or even sometimes nanny’s. It’s the woman married to a guy making a low salary that is actually going to bust her ass because they don’t have the money for any help. I know a couple of those, too. This isn’t about the value of what one provided. It’s feeling entitled to what someone else earned. I’ve more than doubled my salary and tripled my assets since my divorce. I did it as a single mom. If I were married would that man suddenly get credit for my hard work? Would it be said that I couldn’t have done it without him? I’m proof that you don’t need a stay at home anything to become successful. You need to hire people.
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on May 30, 2020 9:53:36 GMT -5
Oh and not just a nanny while he worked... that man NEVER took care of a kid... he would have needed round the clock live in care...
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,037
|
Post by teen persuasion on May 30, 2020 9:55:22 GMT -5
Unfortunately what you experienced is probably more the norm than me. I’m prideful to a fault. Women tend to go for everything they can get instead of being happy that for x amount of years, they lived a life they couldn’t afford I don’t know why men get married anymore. I really don’t. At least to women that are either going to not work or earn significantly less then the man. So the high-earners should only marry high earners? Really? My daughter and her husband have five kids ages 4-14. He's a lawyer and a politician; she is basically a stay-at-home mother who works 2 or 3 days a week (sometimes more) as a pharmacist. Are you trying to say that my daughter doesn't deserve half of their marital assets? Lol. That because the bigger paycheck has his name on it, it is his money? It wouldn't be that big if he had to devote 50% of his time taking care of the home and family. She certainly can and does support herself. This is not a model you would choose. We get that. But it doesn't mean that some women don't deserve half just because they didn't have as many zeroes on their pay stub. Thank you! You know, it's funny - DH always refers to the retirement accounts (majority in his name, because he had the access to employer accounts, and I didn't) as not his but mine (teen persuasion's) because left to his own devices he never would have bothered investing. That was all me, I convinced him to contribute, I chose the investments, I convinced him to increase the %, I opened Roth IRAs for both of us, I paid off the mortgage 15 years early, I do our taxes. We are common potters, what either of us earns is for the benefit of the entire family (even the kids!), not just the individual who earned it. We also recognize the unpaid efforts of the other family members (even the kids!) which add to our collective comfort/enjoyment/financial stability - childcare, cooking, lawn care, transportation, investment, taxes, etc. I keep bringing up taxes, because even though I didn't have a salary for nearly 2 decades as SAHM, I did have an indirect "income" as a result of the tax planning I did for our family, and due to the value of my unpaid labor on behalf of the family (as offsetting the increased taxes we'd owe if I were employed/paid and had to outsource those duties to others). If I worked, most/all my pay would be eaten up by childcare expenses, but our new higher AGI would incur higher taxes, so we'd be no further ahead for our increased "income". Instead, my tax planning netted us large refunds, which I used to fund more retirement investments, which further increased our refunds, etc. The nature of our mostly employer based retirement system (401k accounts have higher contribution limits than IRAs, and are only available if an employer offers them) means that the lion's share of our savings had to be placed in DH's name, whether we wanted it that way, or not. As a SAHM, I had only a spousal IRA open to me, while DH had his much larger 401k PLUS the same IRA limit I had. We chose to view each account available to either of us as part of the sum total available to both of us (combined - our accounts, not mine/yours). We chose the best financial vehicles at our disposal for our family's optimized well-being. We have a much greater net worth as a result of planning jointly rather than each managing investment decisions independently within a my money / your money paradigm. In fact, we'd probably have almost nothing invested in that scenario; DH was never interested in investing and wouldn't have done it without my nudges. Without 401k deductions, we'd pay more in taxes, so I'd have little to invest in my name, or divert to paying off the mortgage early (more spending instead of investment). Higher AGI would trigger less financial aid for the kids in college (even more spending, less to invest). Once I did begin working, it was low pay, no benefits (especially retirement), so I'm still limited to IRA only. After 10 years, finally got access to a SIMPLE IRA mid last year. I'm contributing the max, but it's less than a 401k ($13.5k +$3k catchup).
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on May 30, 2020 9:56:26 GMT -5
And they stayed married and that’s great for them. But when a marriage ends, it is awful that a person can be wiped out. I have some substantial assets now and my plan is to keep growing them. If my future husband wouldn’t sign off on any claim to what I earned, he would remain a boyfriend. Marriage is a legal contract that screws over a high earner in the event of a divorce. Otherwise, someone divorcing a rich person wouldn’t walk away with a windfall while someone married to a low earner doesn’t. Does a woman do less work as a SAHM if she married someone making $40k a year versus $400,000? Why ARE you getting married? Why not just keep him as an easily dumpable boyfriend? It's not financial as you both make the same and nobody needs insurance or a green card or anything. It's not religious because that's all "Onto thee, all my worldly possessions" and "better or worse", divorce not in the premarital planning thing. So, what is the draw for you? Actually, it IS about insurance. He is self-employed and gets ass raped for insurance. I have a very generous employer sponsored plan. I also love him very much. But I’m delusional to think that any marriage can’t end in divorce. He knows my feelings and is willing to sign off on everything I’m asking him to. Which means he doesn’t want to marry me for my money or assets. I’m also signing off on anything of his. That’s only fair. He didn’t ask me to do it because he knows I’m a very unusual woman and would never want a cent from him (he sees it with my ex). But what’s right is right I can assure you if he wouldn’t sign a prenup we wouldn’t be getting married. Then I would know it was about money to him.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on May 30, 2020 9:57:32 GMT -5
Oh and not just a nanny while he worked... that man NEVER took care of a kid... he would have needed round the clock live in care... Given the millions you said he has, it would have been cheaper in the long run.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 10:04:02 GMT -5
Why ARE you getting married? Why not just keep him as an easily dumpable boyfriend? It's not financial as you both make the same and nobody needs insurance or a green card or anything. It's not religious because that's all "Onto thee, all my worldly possessions" and "better or worse", divorce not in the premarital planning thing. So, what is the draw for you? Actually, it IS about insurance. He is self-employed and gets ass raped for insurance. I have a very generous employer sponsored plan. I also love him very much. But I’m delusional to think that any marriage can’t end in divorce. He knows my feelings and is willing to sign off on everything I’m asking him to. Which means he doesn’t want to marry me for my money or assets. I’m also signing off on anything of his. That’s only fair. He didn’t ask me to do it because he knows I’m a very unusual woman and would never want a cent from him (he sees it with my ex). But what’s right is right I can assure you if he wouldn’t sign a prenup we wouldn’t be getting married. Then I would know it was about money to him. You do know that a prenup won't help if one day one of you goes into a nursing home? You will be responsible for his support. I know he is also a high earner, but I'd make sure he had good disability and long-term care insurance.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,659
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
Member is Online
|
Post by NoNamePerson on May 30, 2020 10:08:35 GMT -5
I guess a pre-nup in my case back when I got married would have read like this Mr. NNP will retain possession of his record collection, stereo and shot gun. Mrs. NNP shall retain possession of her transistor radio, Samsonite luggage, Smith Corona typewriter. I realize how fortunate I am that my divorce was amicable and we are still on friendly grounds today. He is the one folks felt sorry for especially after his second divorce. She cleaned him out in a very short time. He remarried again and that one lasted for around 25+ yrs. He moved back here about 6 yrs ago and all is well. He did inherit a ton of money during 3rd marriage. Miss Tequila I’ve been divorced 38 yrs. and way older!! So see no need but it is more me knowing me. I can be a bitch of the highest order when married
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on May 30, 2020 10:34:33 GMT -5
Well, if you're hiring out 30K/year in work instead of investing it... According to my Phil Script, a yearly investment of $30,000.00 bearing an annual return of 11% could grow to $2,137,954.31 in 20 years! She wants 1.2... a relative bargain.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on May 30, 2020 12:57:34 GMT -5
If I get married I'd have a prenup. Mostly because I'm due to inherit a family property and I don't care if we put in family money, he won't get it and can't use it as a bargaining chip. And keep assets before the marriage separate.
But otherwise I won't get married if things after marriage aren't split 50/50. I view marriage as a partnership and we'd be equal partners and thus have equal stakes if the partnership dissolves. I couldn't be married to someone who thinks they have a bigger say than me because they make more money. And I wouldn't do that if I earned more.
If we just operate in our own little silos all separate what's the point of getting married?
I'm surprised with the way she talks teqilia isn't demanding some of the money he's going to save on her plan as payment - afterall he's getting something that isn't his.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,659
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
Member is Online
|
Post by NoNamePerson on May 30, 2020 14:02:08 GMT -5
If I get married I'd have a prenup. Mostly because I'm due to inherit a family property and I don't care if we put in family money, he won't get it and can't use it as a bargaining chip. And keep assets before the marriage separate. But otherwise I won't get married if things after marriage aren't split 50/50. I view marriage as a partnership and we'd be equal partners and thus have equal stakes if the partnership dissolves. I couldn't be married to someone who thinks they have a bigger say than me because they make more money. And I wouldn't do that if I earned more. If we just operate in our own little silos all separate what's the point of getting married? I'm surprised with the way she talks teqilia isn't demanding some of the money he's going to save on her plan as payment - afterall he's getting something that isn't his. Could be that he is reimbursing her for the expense? Not commenting one way or another but I know someone who remarried and insurance was a kicker and that is what they did. I could tell tales of that one but that person could be here It was wild even after the divorce!
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,276
|
Post by giramomma on May 30, 2020 14:09:05 GMT -5
Actually, it IS about insurance. He is self-employed and gets ass raped for insurance. I have a very generous employer sponsored plan. Meh. He could have chosen to work for the man and not get ass-raped. It's one of the reasons I work two jobs. The day job, to prevent the ass raping that can occur when one is self-emplyed, and the self-employed side job because it's what I love. And, the super nice thing about working for the man is I can then retire with a full pension that will cover my health insurance premiums (right now, almost 2K/month for retirees not on medicare), and move into the private sector and work and not have to worry about insurance. So, yes, while I might be a dumbass for marrying someone that doesn't make as much as me, I seem not to be a complete dumbass when it came to making sure I ALWAYS had access to good insurance, no? I'm also wondering if domestic partnership is a thing in your state. It is in mine. Boom. Insurance access. No Marriage necessary.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on May 30, 2020 14:18:21 GMT -5
Actually, it IS about insurance. He is self-employed and gets ass raped for insurance. I have a very generous employer sponsored plan. Meh. He could have chosen to work for the man and not get ass-raped. It's one of the reasons I work two jobs. The day job, to prevent the ass raping that can occur when one is self-emplyed, and the self-employed side job because it's what I love. And, the super nice thing about working for the man is I can then retire with a full pension that will cover my health insurance premiums (right now, almost 2K/month for retirees not on medicare), and move into the private sector and work and not have to worry about insurance. So, yes, while I might be a dumbass for marrying someone that doesn't make as much as me, I seem not to be a complete dumbass when it came to making sure I ALWAYS had access to good insurance, no? I'm also wondering if domestic partnership is a thing in your state. It is in mine. Boom. Insurance access. No Marriage necessary.
It is if your company opts to allow it. As of yet, we haven’t. I do see value to marriage but I see a lot of risk. It’s the risk that I don’t think people understand. As for public versus private, the trade off is that you get a pension. However, I know what I would have made in the public sector. The pension would not have been worth it. My salary has allowed me to build a rental portfolio. My net income from that is enough for me to live on now (well, not now that I’m starting to look for new houses in better area). It definitely worked out for me not having a pension. He makes a lot more money working for himself than someone else. It isn’t that he can’t afford his insurance. But since I can get it significantly cheaper, why shouldn’t I? So it’s not the reason we are getting married but definitely one of the reasons it makes sense. It will be a huge chunk of money in our pocket each year.
|
|
WannabeWealthy
Established Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 12:25:17 GMT -5
Posts: 357
|
Post by WannabeWealthy on May 30, 2020 14:19:14 GMT -5
Unfortunately what you experienced is probably more the norm than me. I’m prideful to a fault. Women tend to go for everything they can get instead of being happy that for x amount of years, they lived a life they couldn’t afford I don’t know why men get married anymore. I really don’t. At least to women that are either going to not work or earn significantly less then the man. So the high-earners should only marry high earners? Really? My daughter and her husband have five kids ages 4-14. He's a lawyer and a politician; she is basically a stay-at-home mother who works 2 or 3 days a week (sometimes more) as a pharmacist. Are you trying to say that my daughter doesn't deserve half of their marital assets? Lol. That because the bigger paycheck has his name on it, it is his money? It wouldn't be that big if he had to devote 50% of his time taking care of the home and family. She certainly can and does support herself. This is not a model you would choose. We get that. But it doesn't mean that some women don't deserve half just because they didn't have as many zeroes on their pay stub. Yea, high earners should marry high earners only. That takes the need for thinking strictly about "ones self" out of the equation. My ex wife was a stay at home mother at some points in our marriage, but so? Just because you are a stay at home mother doesn't mean you deserve half someone's salary. We can't automatically assume that. For example, if the husband was working at McDonald's making $50k/yr and he had a SAH mom, she wouldn't get much from the 50% ($25k). But same situation and the husband is a doctor/lawyer making $200k/yr and suddenly that wife is getting a MUCH larger lump of that 50% ($100k) for the same task? So how do you determine value from a stay-at-home parent with respect to someone's salary?
|
|
WannabeWealthy
Established Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 12:25:17 GMT -5
Posts: 357
|
Post by WannabeWealthy on May 30, 2020 14:34:27 GMT -5
I’m a single mom and am able to succeed at my career and I don’t have a wifey. I pay people to do what a wifey would do. You don’t actually need a wife to succeed at work. If you did, I wouldn’t be where I am. You can't say on one hand that you would pay for a nanny, cleaning lady, yard work, whatever and then say a stay at home spouse doesn't add value to a marriage. She's not saying that. She's saying that the divide between a person's assets and a SAHS isn't even. And it isn't. That's just a fact. I would have easily paid someone to come in and clean my kitchen, wash my clothes and clean the house for like $150-$200/week. And I would have kept my house, all of my 401k, all of my stocks, and I'd be sitting pretty. It was my brain that got me where I am today. Not my ex-spouse. Raising our one daughter was a disaster too because we had such different systems of raising a child. Her mom cooked and cleaned all the time while my ex just did her room, etc.. In the marriage, she had to learn how to cook. She resented doing the cooking all the time and wanted me to pitch in. OK, fine. Want me to wash clothes too? OK. Do you want me to clean the pool that you insisted on us buying a house with a pool and promising that you'd take care of the pool? OK. I'll even forgive that and hire a person to clean the pool. What else? Oh. you want me to bail you out of your $60k CC debt that you mustered while being able to keep your entire paycheck to yourself while I paid for every single bill in the house. Fine. Use ALL of your money on your self. Divorce time - give me my money and my retirement and the house that I paid on for 8yrs. Nope. She want 50% of everything I have. Screw that. You never know what people will do when you threaten to "hurt" them in some way.
Looking back at it. Even if she made what I made, I'd still be the one contributing more because of her spending habit. She only took my assets because she didn't save up herself with her own money and assumed I'd pay for her way in life. My marriage was a COMPLETE waste of time and money. I wish I had went with my gut on just wanting to have multiple dates instead of letting a religious principle govern my lifestyle. 22yrs later and looking back - not only did I waste time and could have met several women with better upbringing but I might have had a kid that would be speaking to me today instead of the spoiled entitled little girl that we raised.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 30, 2020 14:44:47 GMT -5
So the high-earners should only marry high earners? Really? My daughter and her husband have five kids ages 4-14. He's a lawyer and a politician; she is basically a stay-at-home mother who works 2 or 3 days a week (sometimes more) as a pharmacist. Are you trying to say that my daughter doesn't deserve half of their marital assets? Lol. That because the bigger paycheck has his name on it, it is his money? It wouldn't be that big if he had to devote 50% of his time taking care of the home and family. She certainly can and does support herself. This is not a model you would choose. We get that. But it doesn't mean that some women don't deserve half just because they didn't have as many zeroes on their pay stub. Yea, high earners should marry high earners only. That takes the need for thinking strictly about "ones self" out of the equation. My ex wife was a stay at home mother at some points in our marriage, but so? Just because you are a stay at home mother doesn't mean you deserve half someone's salary. We can't automatically assume that. For example, if the husband was working at McDonald's making $50k/yr and he had a SAH mom, she wouldn't get much from the 50% ($25k). But same situation and the husband is a doctor/lawyer making $200k/yr and suddenly that wife is getting a MUCH larger lump of that 50% ($100k) for the same task? So how do you determine value from a stay-at-home parent with respect to someone's salary?
This isn't true. My sister recently divorced. When she stepped out of the work force 20 years ago, she was making a comparable salary to her husband. However, her life was unsustainable as she was doing 100% of the childcare, 100% of the cooking, 100% of the housework and the lion's share of the yardwork. Both were essentially in the same field. Fast forward and the divorce decree gave 50% of everything to my sister. Considering that the down payment on the house came from HER retirement accounts prior to them getting together, and that she worked and helped pay the bills on the house from the beginning, and during the marriage took part time jobs to supplement their income, she deserved every penny of that. When she finally managed to get her foot in the door of her former profession after 7 years, she was offered a salary of less than half of what she previously made (understandably, as she was rusty), and nearly 1/4 of what her husband is currently making. She is also receiving spousal support of about $2000/mo (about 1/5 of her ex's take home income) until retirement. That is no where near half. If the stay at home spouse supported the spouse making the higher income while he was in school for a high earning profession, you don't feel like she is due some of this income? If a stay at home spouse took a back door in their profession so the higher income person could make more, should they not be compensated for this?
|
|
WannabeWealthy
Established Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 12:25:17 GMT -5
Posts: 357
|
Post by WannabeWealthy on May 30, 2020 14:52:49 GMT -5
If you are married with non-working spouse - "your" money is your pay/2. That's just the way it goes. "your" part of your savings is total/2. Similar for a lower-earning spouse. Now come on ms tequila, you can't honestly think that a stay at home spouse should be flung out onto the street homeless and destitute after a divorce? If a higher earner doesn't want to support or supplement someone who is not working/low earner - then don't get married or get divorced as soon as your expectations of the other's earnings is 'disappointed'. Split what is there and move on. But don't stayed married for a long time and then expect that you get to keep everything just by calling it "yours". What is "ours" is only "ours" if the courts legally identify it as such. Our great ideas aren't even ours unless with have patent or a copywrite on it. If a court says marital assets are 50% of the account - that is what's "yours" Think of a billion dollar idea at work - haha - you get nothing but your usual paycheck for it. That's because the company owns it not you. At least in a marriage - you are getting 50%. Why anyone thinks they can weasel out of splitting assets in a divorce, it's just naive at best and cruel at worst, and just plain stupid in the middle. If someone is truly a manipulative parasite during a marriage - take some responsibility for your own actions. You knew you were married, you knew the financial implications of that - every single day into month into year you stayed married. It's not like marriage is a fucking legal contract with lots of financial implications....oh - wait, it really is isn't it? Pay your court-ordered stupid tax and move on. Get therapy if you need it. Just because a court declares 50/50 no matter what the circumstance doesn't mean it's fair. It's NOT fair. You guys should admit that. I'm not saying someone shouldn't get some percentage of assets or whatever in a divorce, but damn sure not 50%. That's just wrong all the way around. My ex used to threaten me about divorce all the time because she knew that I made the money in the house and I am the one that saved during the marriage. The big question for myself is - would *I* take 50% of someone's money that I know I didn't deserve despite what the state tells me I'm entitled to? The answer is a big fat NO. I don't like taking things from people that I would not have been able to amass or afford myself on my own. To me, it's stealing. My daughter and I couldn't get along in my new house so I told her she needed to leave. I did her a favor before we moved into my new house. I applied for a furniture store card and bought all of her bedroom suite items with it. We had an understanding that she would pay me each month a fraction of that cost until 2yrs lapsed. That would be the end of the 0% offer. When my daughter stopped cooking for me in the house, I told her that I would cook but she would have to pay for anything that we spent over $500. Well, she took the $500 and used most of it for her dietary food that I wasn't on so that she would only have to pay for small amount of money above the $500. That wouldn't work, so I stopped that and told her to give me $300/month for rent and she pay for her own food (she had a full time job). That went along well for about 5 months until our relationship hit the gutter. Made her move out. So what did she do? She stopped paying on that furniture bill. I asked her why was she doing that? Her response was that I shouldn't have charged her rent in the first place and that the rent money that she gave me should have been used to pay for her furniture bill. Sounds just like her mother.
I don't talk to my daughter today nor my ex. Unfortunately, the courts don't see the details or the inner minds of people. But some people are horrible, selfish and only think about themselves.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,018
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on May 30, 2020 14:56:16 GMT -5
You can't say on one hand that you would pay for a nanny, cleaning lady, yard work, whatever and then say a stay at home spouse doesn't add value to a marriage. She's not saying that. She's saying that the divide between a person's assets and a SAHS isn't even. And it isn't. That's just a fact. I would have easily paid someone to come in and clean my kitchen, wash my clothes and clean the house for like $150-$200/week. And I would have kept my house, all of my 401k, all of my stocks, and I'd be sitting pretty. It was my brain that got me where I am today. Not my ex-spouse. Raising our one daughter was a disaster too because we had such different systems of raising a child. Her mom cooked and cleaned all the time while my ex just did her room, etc.. In the marriage, she had to learn how to cook. She resented doing the cooking all the time and wanted me to pitch in. OK, fine. Want me to wash clothes too? OK. Do you want me to clean the pool that you insisted on us buying a house with a pool and promising that you'd take care of the pool? OK. I'll even forgive that and hire a person to clean the pool. What else? Oh. you want me to bail you out of your $60k CC debt that you mustered while being able to keep your entire paycheck to yourself while I paid for every single bill in the house. Fine. Use ALL of your money on your self. Divorce time - give me my money and my retirement and the house that I paid on for 8yrs. Nope. She want 50% of everything I have. Screw that. You never know what people will do when you threaten to "hurt" them in some way.
Looking back at it. Even if she made what I made, I'd still be the one contributing more because of her spending habit. She only took my assets because she didn't save up herself with her own money and assumed I'd pay for her way in life. My marriage was a COMPLETE waste of time and money. I wish I had went with my gut on just wanting to have multiple dates instead of letting a religious principle govern my lifestyle. 22yrs later and looking back - not only did I waste time and could have met several women with better upbringing but I might have had a kid that would be speaking to me today instead of the spoiled entitled little girl that we raised.
And you will never mend this relationship with your entitled attitude. Seriously - do you even want to know your daughter? Or only if she is what you want her to be? I suggest asking your daughter to go with you to family therapy and listen to her and what this 22 years of marriage felt like to the child in the house.
|
|
WannabeWealthy
Established Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 12:25:17 GMT -5
Posts: 357
|
Post by WannabeWealthy on May 30, 2020 14:56:42 GMT -5
Yea, high earners should marry high earners only. That takes the need for thinking strictly about "ones self" out of the equation. My ex wife was a stay at home mother at some points in our marriage, but so? Just because you are a stay at home mother doesn't mean you deserve half someone's salary. We can't automatically assume that. For example, if the husband was working at McDonald's making $50k/yr and he had a SAH mom, she wouldn't get much from the 50% ($25k). But same situation and the husband is a doctor/lawyer making $200k/yr and suddenly that wife is getting a MUCH larger lump of that 50% ($100k) for the same task? So how do you determine value from a stay-at-home parent with respect to someone's salary?
This isn't true. My sister recently divorced. When she stepped out of the work force 20 years ago, she was making a comparable salary to her husband. However, her life was unsustainable as she was doing 100% of the childcare, 100% of the cooking, 100% of the housework and the lion's share of the yardwork. Both were essentially in the same field. Fast forward and the divorce decree gave 50% of everything to my sister. Considering that the down payment on the house came from HER retirement accounts prior to them getting together, and that she worked and helped pay the bills on the house from the beginning, and during the marriage took part time jobs to supplement their income, she deserved every penny of that. When she finally managed to get her foot in the door of her former profession after 7 years, she was offered a salary of less than half of what she previously made (understandably, as she was rusty), and nearly 1/4 of what her husband is currently making. She is also receiving spousal support of about $2000/mo (about 1/5 of her ex's take home income) until retirement. That is no where near half. If the stay at home spouse supported the spouse making the higher income while he was in school for a high earning profession, you don't feel like she is due some of this income? If a stay at home spouse took a back door in their profession so the higher income person could make more, should they not be compensated for this? I'm not sure why you said "this isn't true". It was an example. Yes, I think that if you stay at home for a short period of time to accomplish a goal, it's not really a SAH parent as far as I'm concerned. I'm talking about a SAH parent that is that way for the entire length of time they are married with no way of getting an equivalent job to the spouse. In your situation, the wife contributed a LOT to the marriage. This is not normally the case.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,018
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on May 30, 2020 14:58:29 GMT -5
If you are married with non-working spouse - "your" money is your pay/2. That's just the way it goes. "your" part of your savings is total/2. Similar for a lower-earning spouse. Now come on ms tequila, you can't honestly think that a stay at home spouse should be flung out onto the street homeless and destitute after a divorce? If a higher earner doesn't want to support or supplement someone who is not working/low earner - then don't get married or get divorced as soon as your expectations of the other's earnings is 'disappointed'. Split what is there and move on. But don't stayed married for a long time and then expect that you get to keep everything just by calling it "yours". What is "ours" is only "ours" if the courts legally identify it as such. Our great ideas aren't even ours unless with have patent or a copywrite on it. If a court says marital assets are 50% of the account - that is what's "yours" Think of a billion dollar idea at work - haha - you get nothing but your usual paycheck for it. That's because the company owns it not you. At least in a marriage - you are getting 50%. Why anyone thinks they can weasel out of splitting assets in a divorce, it's just naive at best and cruel at worst, and just plain stupid in the middle. If someone is truly a manipulative parasite during a marriage - take some responsibility for your own actions. You knew you were married, you knew the financial implications of that - every single day into month into year you stayed married. It's not like marriage is a fucking legal contract with lots of financial implications....oh - wait, it really is isn't it? Pay your court-ordered stupid tax and move on. Get therapy if you need it. Just because a court declares 50/50 no matter what the circumstance doesn't mean it's fair. It's NOT fair. You guys should admit that. I'm not saying someone shouldn't get some percentage of assets or whatever in a divorce, but damn sure not 50%. That's just wrong all the way around. My ex used to threaten me about divorce all the time because she knew that I made the money in the house and I am the one that saved during the marriage. The big question for myself is - would *I* take 50% of someone's money that I know I didn't deserve despite what the state tells me I'm entitled to? The answer is a big fat NO. I don't like taking things from people that I would not have been able to amass or afford myself on my own. To me, it's stealing. My daughter and I couldn't get along in my new house so I told her she needed to leave. I did her a favor before we moved into my new house. I applied for a furniture store card and bought all of her bedroom suite items with it. We had an understanding that she would pay me each month a fraction of that cost until 2yrs lapsed. That would be the end of the 0% offer. When my daughter stopped cooking for me in the house, I told her that I would cook but she would have to pay for anything that we spent over $500. Well, she took the $500 and used most of it for her dietary food that I wasn't on so that she would only have to pay for small amount of money above the $500. That wouldn't work, so I stopped that and told her to give me $300/month for rent and she pay for her own food (she had a full time job). That went along well for about 5 months until our relationship hit the gutter. Made her move out. So what did she do? She stopped paying on that furniture bill. I asked her why was she doing that? Her response was that I shouldn't have charged her rent in the first place and that the rent money that she gave me should have been used to pay for her furniture bill. Sounds just like her mother.
I don't talk to my daughter today nor my ex. Unfortunately, the courts don't see the details or the inner minds of people. But some people are horrible, selfish and only think about themselves.
Who are you thinking about?
|
|
WannabeWealthy
Established Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 12:25:17 GMT -5
Posts: 357
|
Post by WannabeWealthy on May 30, 2020 15:00:43 GMT -5
She's not saying that. She's saying that the divide between a person's assets and a SAHS isn't even. And it isn't. That's just a fact. I would have easily paid someone to come in and clean my kitchen, wash my clothes and clean the house for like $150-$200/week. And I would have kept my house, all of my 401k, all of my stocks, and I'd be sitting pretty. It was my brain that got me where I am today. Not my ex-spouse. Raising our one daughter was a disaster too because we had such different systems of raising a child. Her mom cooked and cleaned all the time while my ex just did her room, etc.. In the marriage, she had to learn how to cook. She resented doing the cooking all the time and wanted me to pitch in. OK, fine. Want me to wash clothes too? OK. Do you want me to clean the pool that you insisted on us buying a house with a pool and promising that you'd take care of the pool? OK. I'll even forgive that and hire a person to clean the pool. What else? Oh. you want me to bail you out of your $60k CC debt that you mustered while being able to keep your entire paycheck to yourself while I paid for every single bill in the house. Fine. Use ALL of your money on your self. Divorce time - give me my money and my retirement and the house that I paid on for 8yrs. Nope. She want 50% of everything I have. Screw that. You never know what people will do when you threaten to "hurt" them in some way.
Looking back at it. Even if she made what I made, I'd still be the one contributing more because of her spending habit. She only took my assets because she didn't save up herself with her own money and assumed I'd pay for her way in life. My marriage was a COMPLETE waste of time and money. I wish I had went with my gut on just wanting to have multiple dates instead of letting a religious principle govern my lifestyle. 22yrs later and looking back - not only did I waste time and could have met several women with better upbringing but I might have had a kid that would be speaking to me today instead of the spoiled entitled little girl that we raised.
And you will never mend this relationship with your entitled attitude. Seriously - do you even want to know your daughter? Or only if she is what you want her to be? I suggest asking your daughter to go with you to family therapy and listen to her and what this 22 years of marriage felt like to the child in the house. What am I entitled about? I have an attitude that I work for what I have.
No, I don't know my daughter. I raised her for the entire 19yrs. She can be whatever she wants. But treating me like shit isn't going to be tolerated. How are you defending her when you don't even know me? That's funny to me. I did the counseling thing too. It didn't work.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 30, 2020 15:11:33 GMT -5
This isn't true. My sister recently divorced. When she stepped out of the work force 20 years ago, she was making a comparable salary to her husband. However, her life was unsustainable as she was doing 100% of the childcare, 100% of the cooking, 100% of the housework and the lion's share of the yardwork. Both were essentially in the same field. Fast forward and the divorce decree gave 50% of everything to my sister. Considering that the down payment on the house came from HER retirement accounts prior to them getting together, and that she worked and helped pay the bills on the house from the beginning, and during the marriage took part time jobs to supplement their income, she deserved every penny of that. When she finally managed to get her foot in the door of her former profession after 7 years, she was offered a salary of less than half of what she previously made (understandably, as she was rusty), and nearly 1/4 of what her husband is currently making. She is also receiving spousal support of about $2000/mo (about 1/5 of her ex's take home income) until retirement. That is no where near half. If the stay at home spouse supported the spouse making the higher income while he was in school for a high earning profession, you don't feel like she is due some of this income? If a stay at home spouse took a back door in their profession so the higher income person could make more, should they not be compensated for this? I'm not sure why you said "this isn't true". It was an example. Yes, I think that if you stay at home for a short period of time to accomplish a goal, it's not really a SAH parent as far as I'm concerned. I'm talking about a SAH parent that is that way for the entire length of time they are married with no way of getting an equivalent job to the spouse. In your situation, the wife contributed a LOT to the marriage. This is not normally the case.
In our research in looking what a viable spousal support that my sister could expect, there was very little that said that she should be able to expect 50% of her ex's income. That is why. YOUR wife apparently did not contribute a lot to YOUR marriage. You cannot say that this is not the case everywhere, any more than you can say that a judge awards 50% of income for spousal support. Realize, this does NOT include child support. This is a whole 'nuther situation. If you consider that the statistics show that women are more likely to come out worse in a divorce than better, your comments do not make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 30, 2020 15:13:04 GMT -5
And you will never mend this relationship with your entitled attitude. Seriously - do you even want to know your daughter? Or only if she is what you want her to be? I suggest asking your daughter to go with you to family therapy and listen to her and what this 22 years of marriage felt like to the child in the house. What am I entitled about? I have an attitude that I work for what I have.
No, I don't know my daughter. I raised her for the entire 19yrs. She can be whatever she wants. But treating me like shit isn't going to be tolerated. How are you defending her when you don't even know me? That's funny to me. I did the counseling thing too. It didn't work.
You raised her and she won't talk to you and treats you like shit. It sounds like you are reaping what you sowed.
|
|