Wife divorcing ex-CEO: $43 million not enough

Good for you. There could be a lot more marriages if more people thought like you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You assume the institution of marriage is just for sex?

They apparently wouldn't necessarily last.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, the assets are divided *equally* (half/half). Is the spouse who stayed home deserving of spousal support? No! They made a decision to choose family over career, it shouldn't be the government's job to help them get their 'pound of flesh' back from the other spouse. Also note that a lot of men would have loved to stay at home with the kids, but didn't because of the expectation of being the bread winner.

Depends on the man and the marriage. For example, if he comes into a relationship with 43 million dollars and a mansion, and then it gets split with his wife during the divorce process, then yeah, he is losing half of his stuff.

I also personally know of one particular marriage where the husband works, often on overseas contracts, while the woman stays home and does fuck all. Her kids are grown up, all she does is sit on Youtube and hang out with her aging friends. The thought of her receiving half of the assets in a divorce churns my stomach.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now you might understand how having to pay spousal support feels. After all, it's our obligation to financially satisify our future wife, even when we are fucking divorced. Obviously we men bring nothing to the table but money, we are cash cows to be milked mercilessly by women, with the approval of the nanny government (hey, it saves them on welfare payments!).

I didn't know that men only married for money. If they didn't, then spousal support wouldn't be an issue. They would move the fuck on after divorce and provide for their own needs.

It's an exchange of services. Her sex for my money. And if I'm going to be paying spousal support after divorce, she had better put out three times a day, for at least an hour.

 

Divorce law is a big con. The only party which wins is the lawyers. Usually the man loses his assets to the woman, and the woman loses whatever she gained from the man to the lawyers.

 

When a relative of mine got divorced after two years of marriage, one child born, his wife wanted everything, plus half his income (even though she made as much as him), plus him paying all future payments on their newly purchased house, plus she wanted to limit child visitation to a few hours a week, no overnighters. She was shocked, shaking & crying to learn from the judge that she couldn't have everything she wanted. She only got about 75% of everything.

 

That is why after me and my EX settled down and came to our senses we decided to draw up our own settlement and present it to the lawyer to write up.
We were both fair and didn't see why we should pay the lawyers anymore then we had to. But of course my lawyer questioned it and tried to get me to go after more child support because of his income. I told him straight out that NO that is what we decided and that is how it was staying. I mean I was not out to squeeze every last penny I could get out of him and tie things up any longer then I had to.
To this day we are civil to eachother and the kids are happy and not wanting for anything. It all worked out because we didn't try and shaft eachother out of anger or revenge and fill the pockets of lawyers instead of our own.

I stayed home with the kids for many yrs while he worked. Then I started my own business later on. When we split his income tripled mine, so what?
That doesn't mean I expected him to take care of me anymore, we weren't together. I really don't get how ppl don't get the simple equation........

Divorced= Not together anymore, not obligated to the other person for anything anymore. (except your children, but that is different story)

 

shorty why did you use vampires at all?
I think, in australia at least the family court is happy to accept self representation and im pritty sure they like it when the couple have already negotiated there own deal and just want the courts signiture. Makes there life easier and saves money

 

We had everything negotiated between us when we went to separate lawyers. All we needed them to do was write up the divorce papers with all the particulars. He paid for his lawyer, I paid for mine. We never went to court or anything.

 

What if during the marriage both partners decided that one would give up their career to raise children ect.

Then if the marriage comes to an end when say the partners are 45 years old it will be unlikely the partner who gave up their career to instantly begin making the amount of money he/she would have if they had continued their working career.

Assuming this was a mutual decision between both partners it makes reasonable sense for financial obligation to extend beyond the end of the marriage.

 

lol, sorry for coming back here but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sS_KtQAFUk

goodbye

 

You're assuming I haven't. You don't have to "financially satisfy" her, but you have to make sure she's got enough to get by reasonably given previous lifestyle and her skillset.

Sex and money are worlds apart. Hey, set up a prenup.

Money is necessary for living. If I marry a millionaire who I am madly in love with, and he tells me he wants me to focus on my art, and then we fall out of love, I don't see it as fair I'm left with zip.

But you don't continue her lifestyle for a few years after marriage as a service exchange. It's an obligation.

And I seriously hope you're being hyperbolic and not thinking you're impressing me.

 

If he wants you to focus on your art, you say "art probably won't make me a living if needed, so I'll keep my current job, thank you".

But you know that's a farce anyway. You'd do the art because you don't want to work for the man anymore; you'd want to take it easy, and you could, because you'd know that ex-hubby would have to maintain your new relaxing lifestyle forevermore. In other words, you like welfare.

 

That is the chance you take.

 

I guess I'm not that emotionally invested in other people's relationships.

 

Incorrect. The law says we split assets attained during the marriage.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I know someone who bought a house his new wife picked out. He used the insurance money he got from his 1st wife's death. When this rebound wife divorced him she tried to take the house, but he proved he used money he had before they married. She was out on her ass.

 

That's pretty funny. How long before the idiot tried divorcing him?

 

within 18 mths. She was sleeping with the town vet.

 

Not in every state. In Wisconsin, it's half of your assets no matter when you earned them. Even if your name isn't on the Title of ownership.
http://wsll.state.wi.us/topic/familylaw/maritalproperty.html