Talk About Marriage banner
281 - 300 of 333 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
I had a really good wise solicitor. He said that who did what is irrelevant in how assets are distributed and who pays what to who. He said it's about children first, then making sure that each can afford to live and pay their bills.
Child support is about putting children first. A skank shouldn't be rewarded with money for herself(or his self). My ex wife wasn't going to get alimony come hell or high water. She tried. She failed.

I calculated all my child support and even though the custodial mother is financially responsible for her half of their needs, my support covered everything. Clothes, their portion of the grocery bill, their portion of the mortgage, property taxes, school expenses, utilities. Everything.

She chose to not work when she got remarried and didn't use my support for them. She would have been able to pay her portion of the bills and have a few thousand left over from my child support every year to do with as she wishes had she gotten a job. So basically my support would have had my kids costing her absolutely nothing out of her own pocket, yet she chose to use it as her own personal income and deny my kids what they should have gotten and deserved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
It very much depends on who her friends are and why she is getting divorced. It’s important not to judge all women by a few bad ones. How often do men say “I want a stay at home wife and mother” and proceed to cheat constantly, because what is she gonna do, she has no money? A LOT!
I didn't want my X to be a SAHM. I wanted her to contribute to the household income. My mother was more than willing to babysit, so that would have been fortunate.

But oh boy, did she try to use that in negotiations with our lawyers. "I was a SAHM, so I didn't have the opportunity to make an income."

My lawyer's response based on his discussion with me: "Your client(x-skag) was a SAHM by HER choice. My client preferred that she worked, therefore he did not force her to be a SAHM. Also your client has a degree in business, of which my client paid for."

Alimony dropped, but they tried to say they'd drop it in exchange for more of the assets. My lawyer's response: "No."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
Yea, and men are always so wonderful and fair about splitting assets if the couple divorces. You know, men never get all emotional and very mean and unfair things during divorce.

Your view of women is just awful. I hope your teen relatives come to realize that your attitude and advice is counter productive to their future.
Agreed. Men are just as ruthless when it comes to those things. Hiding assets, trying to undervalue retirement accounts, playing dirty.

I'll admit, I played dirty. But it was only after I was amicable to being fair....then her lawyer's first draft of demands came in. Basically asked for everything leaving me to go out and start over. I freaked and told my lawyer to simply do what he has to do that I'll go in debt before I pay her a dime of alimony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #289 ·
10 pages of rants about why its not OK to hide assets or don't marry if you don't want to share assets, can we move on to topic of thread, namely how do we separate assets before and during a marriage. I have heard two good suggestions so far 1) Prenup/Postnup 2) Create a trust before marriage. Any other ideas, ex. a huge loan from parents prior to, having assets in another country etc.?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
47,553 Posts
On the flip side, why would a woman feel that she has the right to any assets that a man had before they got married? Sounds mercenary to me.
No one here is suggesting that any woman should feel that she has the right to any assets that a man had before they got married.

In most, if not all, states assets owned prior to marriage are separate assets. So are inheritances. Pre-marriage debts are also separate debts. The person who has separate assets needs to make sure that they are not mingled with marital assets.

(ETA: just re-read some posts. I guess Diane was saying this and you quoted the wrong post. That's apparently how Diane & her husband prefer it in their marriage. Their choice.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,947 Posts
No one here is suggesting that any woman should feel that she has the right to any assets that a man had before they got married.

In most, if not all, states assets owned prior to marriage are separate assets. So are inheritances. Pre-marriage debts are also separate debts. The person who has separate assets needs to make sure that they are not mingled with marital assets.

(ETA: just re-read some posts. I guess Diane was saying this and you quoted the wrong post. That's apparently how Diane & her husband prefer it in their marriage. Their choice.)
Yeah. Somehow I quoted Livvie. Don't know how that happened
 
  • Like
Reactions: EleGirl

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #293 ·
There is also a generational shift going on with younger couples preferring separate finances. The law will eventually catch up to this shift (similar to what happened with same sex marriages)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
There is also a generational shift going on with younger couples preferring separate finances. The law will eventually catch up to this shift (similar to what happened with same sex marriages)
The issue isn't during the marriage. It's during the divorce. Divorce discovery requires you to disclose all assets, even separate accounts like the couples in your article. If the other side suspects you may be hiding something, they will engage forensic accountants. Being the high earner, chances are very good you're on the hook for both side's legal bills, including experts like accountants. Unless you are very, very wealthy you're going to find that the legal fees eat up any possible benefit your hidden asset may have for you.

Will the law eventually change? Maybe. But until then you have to work with the laws you have , not the laws you want. Stick with the prenups and don't try to hide anything. In fact, full disclosure during prenup creation will only make it more binding. If you hide something and it's later discovered, that prenup might be tissue paper when you try to use it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,535 Posts
But what I am failing to understand with your position is why does money affect love? Especially for women?
Just because I might fall in love with someone doesn't automatically follow that they will have access to assets that I worked my ass off to get BEFORE I even met them. Not only is that risky, it is just plain stupid. Yes, if I ever (and it's a big IF) end up with someone they will be taken care of but it's my kids who will benefit from my hard work.
That's is what you need to talk about before you marry.
If I don't trust the guy then it's best to stay single.
It's just how I see marriage as being I guess. I have always had joint accounts in both marriages. All money and income has always been joint whether earnings or inheritances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,535 Posts
There is also a generational shift going on with younger couples preferring separate finances. The law will eventually catch up to this shift (similar to what happened with same sex marriages)
It's really not the case in the many young couples we know who are married.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,535 Posts
Not sure the sons are going to find any woman who's going to marry them under these circumstances... it's like saying to them, sorry, I don't really trust you... please sign this disclaimer... :giggle: I would not ask to sign one, even if I were filthy rich. I just wouldn't get married.
Absolutely. I would run a mile from a man with that terrible attitude.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #298 ·
Will the law eventually change? Maybe. But until then you have to work with the laws you have , not the laws you want. Stick with the prenups and don't try to hide anything. In fact, full disclosure during prenup creation will only make it more binding. If you hide something and it's later discovered, that prenup might be tissue paper when you try to use it.
That's what I am trying to do here, 'work with the law'. However there are many options other than pre-nups I am trying to explore. One example, Dad buys a house and rents to Son and wife. Son pays rent for a few years and divorces. All rent payments are removed from marital property. Few years after divorce is final Dad gifts house to Son. This is perfectly legal in at least 20 states, in many cases judges don't want to hear about these legal transactions and your 'forensic accountants' can't do much
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
That's what I am trying to do here, 'work with the law'. However there are many options other than pre-nups I am trying to explore. One example, Dad buys a house and rents to Son and wife. Son pays rent for a few years and divorces. All rent payments are removed from marital property. Few years after divorce is final Dad gifts house to Son. This is perfectly legal in at least 20 states, in many cases judges don't want to hear about these legal transactions and your 'forensic accountants' can't do much
Sounds to me like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Plus is Dad happy paying income tax on the rent income?

edit: Also, Dad may find himself the target of depositions during the divorce proceedings concerning the disposition of that rental property. If the other side's lawyers or accountants are suspicious, he could face some pretty uncomfortable questions, including of the intention to use the home as a haven for the son's assets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #300 ·
Sounds to me like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Plus is Dad happy paying income tax on the rent income?
The income tax is offset by mortgage deduction. The lawsuit will be thrown out in at least 20 states as all transactions are perfectly legal. Judges don't care if one partner blows away all the marital property. Only assets at time of divorce are considered
 
281 - 300 of 333 Posts
Top