Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 551
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?Page 23 of 32    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32)

Sorry mjyawn67. I tried to shake her off the subject, but it didn't work.

As far as mighter than the Titanic- I have no intention of colliding with an iceberg and sinking...not this week anyway

I HAVE, at least twice, attempted to return the topic to it's original question, and posted an excerpt from what certainly APPEARS to be a non-biased website-of the legal benefits of marriage.

But yeah-there's a streak in me of liking to rattle cages, poke holes in bags of hot air, play Devil's Advocate...it's not that I'm TRYING to be the most contrary old bat on the planet- I just AM.
Seriously, can't recall ever meeting a Canadian that I didn't like.
Don't know as I'd MARRY one...don't know as I'd marry a US man either.
It would have to be a true alignment of the stars, the Universe in harmony. And it would take time of course, to run down the entire Supreme Court, Judge Judy, Oprah Winfrey, President Obama and Miss Manners to craft my prenup.
Then we'll have to find a seriously heavy-duty tractor-trailer to deliver the damn thing for signing...by then I reckon I'll be plumb wore out.
Cindy O
 UnixGrand
Joined: 5/9/2011
Msg: 552
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/15/2011 10:11:25 PM
As far as mighter than the Titanic- I have no intention of colliding with an iceberg and sinking...not this week anyway

I HAVE, at least twice, attempted to return the topic to it's original question, and posted an excerpt from what certainly APPEARS to be a non-biased website-of the legal benefits of marriage.

But yeah-there's a streak in me of liking to rattle cages, poke holes in bags of hot air, play Devil's Advocate...it's not that I'm TRYING to be the most contrary old bat on the planet- I just AM.
Seriously, can't recall ever meeting a Canadian that I didn't like.
Don't know as I'd MARRY one...don't know as I'd marry a US man either.
It would have to be a true alignment of the stars, the Universe in harmony. And it would take time of course, to run down the entire Supreme Court, Judge Judy, Oprah Winfrey, President Obama and Miss Manners to craft my prenup.
Then we'll have to find a seriously heavy-duty tractor-trailer to deliver the damn thing for signing...by then I reckon I'll be plumb wore out.
Cindy O


Please never change for anyone. You are definitely a worthy opponent. And if you ever did get MARRIED again.... I don't think there's a police force big enough to handle you! [ONLY JOKING]. My hats off to you.

P.S. I also admire Judge Judy. Besides she grew up in the same town as me. And remember... If it doesn't make sense, it's not true! Now carry on.....
 RazzleRoadRunner
Joined: 4/13/2007
Msg: 553
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/15/2011 10:49:47 PM

What's funny is that it was fairly obvious that HE was the gold-digger in the scenario. The woman got fed up with his bullying, domineering, controlling and abusive ways-FINALLY.


Here is another reason women should really exercise some caution when considering marriage...........are you sure you really KNOW him as well as you THINK you know him.

A Mormon man (who was disassociated by his religious organization) and who lives in my parents community is now on his 5th marriage. The 1st wife died of cancer after giving birth and raising 5 girls, the 2nd wife divorced him because he was controlling and sometimes had an out-of-control temper, the 3rd wife died (unsure of cause of death, but she left him a $100,000 insurance policy) of which he refused to share with her children, 4th wife divorced him and now the 5th wife, who is also quite wealthy.

When this man dates women, he is very tight-lipped about his past and the women do not push for answers, because they don't want to anger him. The 5th wife was warned by a member of my family.................MAN WHO DOES NOT WANT TO SAY MUCH................HAS MUCH TO HIDE. Anyway, the 5th wife has a son who lives next door to his mother, and he is watching very closely because he is fully aware of this man's past.

Moral of Story.........Women who are soooooooo blind-sided by love that they throw themselves to the wolves or an early grave.
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 554
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 5:56:46 AM
The way I propose to have a marriage run would give my mate the opportunity to save for herself a massive amount of money. Yet I am lambasted for it.

The fact she would be only paying for half the household bills alone is a massive savings.

Rent/Mortgage........$1000.00 per month
1/2 electric bill..........$100.00
Food..........................$300.00
Home ins......................$25.00
Total.......................$1425.00 per month saved
Yearly total...........$17100.00
Ten year total....$171000.00
twenty yr tot....$342000.00

Now these numbers are average maybe even a little low yet the savings are very real.

It seems to me the ones that have railed against my marriage plan are not realizing the advanatge of it.

Tell me does anyone else have a plan that would put $342000.00 dollars in their mates pocket in twenty year time period?

If invested in IRAs or some other saving account that amount could easily top $500,000.00

This is a staggering amount of money yet I am being called greedy among other things.

The pre nup that some say is overprotective protects her assets the same as mine.

Some can't see the forest for the trees they have no vision and lack the cognitive thought to see the positive side of a truly equal marriage.

They are so set in the way it has been done....The lesser earner getting subsidized by the higher earner. They miss a opportunity to acquire their own wealth.

Check my math these numbers are very easy to reach. For the one that sees my way is fair to us both.

Now tell me ladies or men for that matter how many of you have saved $342000.00 in the last 20 years?

No some would rather keep the outdated way of doing it destroying all that wealth just to get half of their ex's money.

I call that cutting off ones nose to spite ones face! The ones that can't see the benefit are the truly greedy ones.

People that lack imagination and would rather get someone elses money than have a chance to build their on wealth.

Yet I and damaged greedy and controlling. Yes anyone that would give their mate the chance to build such a fortune must be mad!

Now if building a small fortune that could easily top a half millon dollars in 20 years is not a good reason to marry I don't know that one exists!

That would be pretty good pay even if you had to do all the house work. I don't know any house keeper that makes ....$342000.00 of disposable income in twenty years!
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 555
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 8:23:16 AM
Mr yawn, I wil try to explain how you come across to me. It may give you insight and nothing I say is intended to disrespect you. First, as you have mentioned more than once, your pre-nup is a wonderful opportunity for someone and I don't really see that it would hinder or dissuade the right woman from marrying you. For me, generosity is in one's spirit and a truly generous person gives more even though they may have less. My sweetie is certainly more generous and giving than I am; I'm more generous than you because I'm willing to give away more of what's mine than you are. That is how I define generosity. In your plan, you lose nothing (nor does she), you both gain benefit, but neither do either of you give to each other. One can certainly argue that any giving can be done outside financial stuff and thats true, but I would expect the non-sharing spirit in the financial arrangements to be reflected in the personal aspects as well and that would not work for me.

This is not to say that one shouldn't take steps to protect assets or kids, but I think theres some middle ground between keeping it all and losing it all. That middle ground doesn't necessarily mean 50 50 of everything, but I would want to feel we are building together, financially as well in our relationship.


Again, no disrespect to what you believe is right for you, just a different viewpoint that might explain the reaction you perceive.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 556
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 9:47:05 AM

willing to give away more of what's mine than you are. That is how I define generosity. In your plan, you lose nothing (nor does she), you both gain benefit, but neither do either of you give to each other. One can certainly argue that any giving can be done outside financial stuff and thats true, but I would expect the non-sharing spirit in the financial arrangements to be reflected in the personal aspects as well

Precisely.

This is not to say that one shouldn't take steps to protect assets or kids, but I think theres some middle ground between keeping it all and losing it all. That middle ground doesn't necessarily mean 50 50 of everything, but I would want to feel we are building together, financially as well in our relationship.

Exactly.
Whether or not any given person chooses to consider the "teamwork" concept..the premise of marriage, spiritually, socially, legally and hopefully emotionally-is of a partnership where the 2 become as one. I believe I previously posted an excerpt from a website that touched on the UNIQUE aspects of marriage as a contract, that it could NOT be treated exactly the same in the matter of dissolution,as an ordinary contract or partnership.

The way I propose to have a marriage run would give my mate the opportunity to save for herself a massive amount of money. Yet I am lambasted for it.

Lambasted??? We are asking questions, we are pointing out possible drawbacks, we are offering the perspective of the opposite gender( without going back through the entire thread,my overall impression is that other male posters neither lambaste nor support you-or your plan.)

Now, I have a confusion...at one point you were stating frequently that your next ex would be living "rent-free"...but your current breakdown mentions a mortgage payment? Or is that HALF of a mortgage payment?
I know several female posters pointed out that they would NOT be comfortable about living "rent free" in someone elses' house. At one time you made references to your house being paid for.But still the argument could be made that making a rent payment would give a person some standing as a paying tenant,and therefore some rights in terms of respect for their personal belongings, AND coverage under the laws that address a paying tenant's right to prior notice of lease termination or tenancy termination.
Now, in this latest breakdown you do reference a rent/mortgage payment-or does this figure reflect half of a rent or mortgage payment? I realize that residential real estate prices and rents can vary in different areas, but are you suggesting that a single woman would be making a rent or mortgage payment of $2000 a month, $200 a mo. electric bill(OK might be understandable if climate control is completely electric)...seems to me a single woman who really wanted to save money could find a cheaper place, get in a room-mate or 2, and maintain her autonomy. So you see that what you are offering isn't necessarily a great bargain, great favor,golden opportunity to save money, anyway in my opinion.

Tell me does anyone else have a plan that would put $342000.00 dollars in their mates pocket in twenty year time period?
Do you really think that a lot of women can't save money unless a man helps her? If she has a decent income and makes wise choices/compromises in housing and money management, she could save money in her own right.

Some can't see the forest for the trees they have no vision and lack the cognitive thought to see the positive side of a truly equal marriage.

No, your kids own the house, your vehicles,your business. You actually have no assets or income. She does.This is equal-how??
I don't know about anybody else, but I would be very hesitant to marry a man whose kids owned his home, his business, his vehicles,a guy who apparently has no earnings and thus doesn't pay into the Social Security system. I would be worried about tax implications, and if the IRS ever decided that back taxes were owed, no prenup would protect MY assets . I would have to hire representation to do that.
Don't misunderstand me,I UNDERSTAND the concept of "asset protection" as it applies to catastrophic or long-term medical expenses,against personal liability in some occupational and professional fields, or to keep the vissictudes of starting up a business concern from damaging one's personal credit history -or to keep one's personal credit from IMPEDING the development of a business.I'm not nearly as dumb as I look-being blonde is a prtty good disguise, no?-
The thing about any kind of asset protection strategy is to make sure you aren't painting yourself into a corner, shooting yourself in the foot, or that it can't come around and bite you in the butt at the worst possible moment.
Check the numbers? What I don't like is some of the potential ramifications.It ain't about the numbers.
Cindy O
 RazzleRoadRunner
Joined: 4/13/2007
Msg: 557
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 10:24:06 AM

Oh, and btw, were you to be planning to marry again, would you be presenting your prospective bride-and her attorney-with a complete disclosure of the LLC thing, and the fact that she would get NOTHING in the event of your death,and probably would be evicted by the "owners" of your house and business? That since you don't get a salary, there will be no Social Security surviving spouse benefits? I mean, hopefully she will have her own resources, but still, complete disclosure would be the honorable thing to do. And I think she should be aware of your penniless state, she might hav concerns about having to pay you alimony in the event of a divorce-since you have practically nothing to your name. Hope her attorney cautions her about that possibility. What was that about protecting HER assets? yeah I bet. Looking to appear to the court as a pauper?


These questions still remain unanswered and probably will remain unanswered to any potential bride!!

Deflection, avoidance and evasion are useful tactics to the person trying to deceive another.

Moral to story...people who are evasive either by using silence or anger as a tactic, have much to hide. Judge Judy knows this almost better than anyone else!
 RazzleRoadRunner
Joined: 4/13/2007
Msg: 558
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 11:47:19 AM

That would be pretty good pay even if you had to do all the house work. I don't know any house keeper that makes ....$342000.00 of disposable income in twenty years!


The average wage for a live in housekeeper in Calgary, Alberta is $22,366.00 per annum and she doesn't have to pay for food or electricity. Her annual wage is all living costs inclusive in the annual wage of $22,366.00 per annum x 20 years = $447,320.00. All of her income is for her personal use and she doesn't have to put up with the demands or abusive behavior of a husband. She will also have the benefits of the Canada Pension Plan upon her retirement and Employment Insurance benefits should her employer choose to divorce, OOPS...I mean terminate her services.

Those are the facts as they would stand in Canada........don't know about the U.S., but things are probably quite similar.

Always do the MATH ladies, it's part of the reason that men wanted to keep women uneducated or to receive only an 8th grade education in the 1930's and earlier years.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 559
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 12:10:12 PM
These questions still remain unanswered and probably will remain unanswered to any potential bride!!

Deflection, avoidance and evasion are useful tactics to the person trying to deceive another.

Moral to story...people who are evasive either by using silence or anger as a tactic, have much to hide.

Indeed! Looking back over the thread, my question about informing a prospective bride, which could have been answered "yes" or "no"-or even "it's complicated" has not been addressed.
Instead, we are provided with a rundown of all the monetary savings that the spouse allegedly would realize.
That isn't the question asked...and again, where does this arrangement leave the wife (and her assets) if this corporation comes under IRS scrutiny? That question didn't get answered either.
I'm sorry, but I see some long-term implications with this arrangement, that have to do with paying in to Social Security, and income taxes. I don't think a prenup would protect a spouses assets if the IRS decides that there has been an underpayment or evasion of income taxes.
Wasn't it income tax evasion that finally caused Al Capone to be sent to jail?
Just a thought crossing my mind.
About the housekeeper scenario-the one difference I can see is that in the US there would be the question of health insurance...in Canada that is covered by a national program. But I am sure that tons of live-in housekeepers have found ways to obtain health care coverage. I really don't know as there would be any workmans' comp implication unless the employer had a certain number(or more) of employees.
That would be the one difference I can think of.
Cindy O
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 560
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 1:15:58 PM

The average wage for a live in housekeeper in Calgary, Alberta is $22,366.00 per annum and she doesn't have to pay for food or electricity.


My neighbor has 2 kids and and a live-in housekeeper which they pay $900 per month. That is $10800 per year - and that's in Toronto.



Oh, and btw, were you to be planning to marry again, would you be presenting your prospective bride-and her attorney-with a complete disclosure of the LLC thing, and the fact that she would get NOTHING in the event of your death,and probably would be evicted by the "owners" of your house and business?


Why doesn't she know that to begin with? I mean to ask, why is she assuming or expecting to get something?



Always do the MATH ladies, it's part of the reason that men wanted to keep women uneducated or to receive only an 8th grade education in the 1930's and earlier years.


You seem to be stuck in the past - 80+ years in the past.



Indeed! Looking back over the thread, my question about informing a prospective bride, which could have been answered "yes" or "no"-or even "it's complicated" has not been addressed.


The question has been addressed indirectly (and now directly):

If you are a bride, and you are about to marry a guy who is making more money than you, and will likely be making more money than you, then marriage (the contract) is DEFINITELY beneficial to you.

If you are a groom and you are about to marry a woman who is making more money than you, and will likely be making more money than you, then marriage (the contract) is DEFINITELY beneficial to you.

If you are a bride, and you are about to marry a guy who is making less money than you, and will likely be making less money than you, then marriage (the contract) is NOT beneficial to you.

If you are a groom, and you are about to marry a woman who is making less money than you, and will likely be making less money than you, then marriage (the contract) is NOT beneficial to you.

If you are a groom or a bride and you are about to marry a spouse who is making as much as you, and will be making as much money as you then whether marriage (the social union) is beneficial to you (both), comes down to the type of person you are marrying.

But since people change over time, it is probably wise to keep things simple and not get married unless you've known each other for a long time (10+ years) and both of you seem to remain a consistent individual.


My general advice to men: Don't get married.

My general advice to women: Marry a rich guy.

And to those with a brain on their shoulders: What's love got to do with it?
 RazzleRoadRunner
Joined: 4/13/2007
Msg: 561
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 1:39:07 PM

My neighbor has 2 kids and and a live-in housekeeper which they pay $900 per month. That is $10800 per year - and that's in Toronto.


Seems to me that Toronto is full of shisters, creeps and bums as Ralph Klein, ex-premier of Alberta once stated so eloquently.

Is the live-in housekeeper working more than 8 hours per day or 44 hours per week or 172 hours per month, because her average hourly wage would be $5.23 if her employer/your neighbor isn't requesting overtime. I believe the general minimum wage in Ontario is currently $10.25 and is $11.28 for homeworkers. I believe your neighbor could be taken to the Human Rights Commission in Ontario on the basis of not paying the minimum wage requirements for Ontario. In addition, your neighbor would also be held responsible for paying the live-in housekeepers employee and employer share portions for the Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance or be fined heavily by Canada Revenue Agency.
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 562
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 1:55:37 PM

Is the live-in housekeeper working more than 8 hours per day or 44 hours per week or 172 hours per month, because her average hourly wage would be $5.23 if her employer/your neighbor isn't requesting overtime.

Even if the room and board is added to the $900 per month, the most that can be "charged" is $341 per month. That would work out to $1241 p/m, divided by 172 hours = $7.21 per hour. Still well under minimum wage.
See http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pdf/fs_domestics.pdf for more details.

Is this housekeeper a foreign national, by chance?
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 563
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 4:20:17 PM

Why doesn't she know that to begin with? I mean to ask, why is she assuming or expecting to get something?

Well, she could "get" drawn into a difficulty with the IRS if they decide to qustion the LLC she married. She could "get" evicted from the marital home by the real owners (the LLCs kids) upon his death. She might choose to take those risks-love is a funny thing sometimes. If indeed she adopts a "what's love got to do with it " philosophy, why would she marry into a situation that could be risky in terms of tax matters, and risky that her spouses' death could leave her homeless if the marital home is ownd by an LLC. I'm not an attorney or an expert on such matters, but if 2 mature adults get married without having a good sense of their new spouse's financial position, then I guess they deserve whatever happens to them.
As far as one posters' ironclad,bulletproof,unsinkable (yeah that's what they said about the Titanic, too) pre-nup, I'm just curious as to what timing is planned for rolling that out, and will the fact that the prospective groom doesn't actually OWN anything, that all of what would appear to be his assets actually belong to his kids,also be introduced along with the prenup? And this is not about expecting to get something, it's about knowing the true financial positioning of someone that you are going to -by law-be fused together with in matters of taxes, credit, inheritance, potential financial liability if the spouse whose assets belong to someon else on paper, experiences a catastrophic or long-term illness that puts them into a care facility? Especially if the person in question has no income(on paper) and may not have paid into Social Security/Medicare? Trust me-the state will make the spouse spend down THEIR assets before granting MedicAid for the person requiring long term institutional care.
In fact, what happens with this LLC thing if the "unpaid employee" wants to retire?
I'm sorry, but the whole damn thing looks to me like an elaborate ruse for somebody to get the bigger half of the pie in a divorce, because he has no income and no assets.
Cindy O
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 564
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 8:54:26 PM
Regarding the housekeepers working hours, that I don't know.




I'm not an attorney or an expert on such matters, but if 2 mature adults get married without having a good sense of their new spouse's financial position, then I guess they deserve whatever happens to them.


If two people won't the sit down and figure out finances and assets prior to marriage, and write a prenup, which excludes assets, but also ensures certain assets are included, then, personally, I think neither should get anything by default.

In fact upon divorce, I think the government should take all their assets, and auction them. And then, with the money raised, buy the couple a big cake with the following writing on it: DUMB ASS!




I'm sorry, but the whole damn thing looks to me like an elaborate ruse for somebody to get the bigger half of the pie in a divorce, because he has no income and no assets.


I doubt he is interested in getting anything from anyone. Rather he is protecting his assets.

And to some degree I think it is the smart thing to do.

Until there is a contract which allows two people to be able to keep their finances and assets completely separate, a contract that is honored by the courts, regardless of cohabitation, marriage or children, I think every person should be concerned about protecting their assets.

Right now, you mingle with someone in some way, and they might be entitled to a large portion of your all you got.

In Ontario, as far as I know, cohabitation after a certain number of months is basically equivalent to marriage. At least with marriage, you sign the marriage certificate. With cohabitation, you enter the contract without written consent - which, in my option, should be illegal.

And the best part of it, the definition of cohabitation is so vague that even with separate residences, finances, etc.. the court can still claim cohabitation. For god sakes, one can probably argue that just because two people went to the movies together, they are cohabiting.
 UnixGrand
Joined: 5/9/2011
Msg: 565
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/16/2011 9:05:21 PM
If two people won't the sit down and figure out finances and assets prior to marriage, and write a prenup, which excludes assets, but also ensures certain assets are included, then, personally, I think neither should get anything by default.

In fact upon divorce, I think the government should take all their assets, and auction them. And then, with the money raised, buy the couple a big cake with the following writing on it: DUMB ASS!


How about Pre-marriage. If the first paragraph is true pre-marriage, then this whole thread would be abolished. Nah.... It will never happen.

I'm not talking prenup.... I'm actually saying that people would need to be mature adults, and do the right thing when the music is over. Turn out the lights.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 566
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 10:23:07 AM

If two people won't the sit down and figure out finances and assets prior to marriage, and write a prenup, which excludes assets, but also ensures certain assets are included, then, personally, I think neither should get anything by default.

In an ideal world that would make sense. But you are still going to have scenarios where people with significant income imbalance exists- and this can and does happen to women as well, note the case I related where it was the man that was the "gold-digger", and the cases mj cited where high earning wives were hit for permanent alimony by husbands who earned less.

There is a principle in setting division of assets, payment of alimony(if applicable) and child support( if applicable) that holds "living in the manner to which they have become accustomed". At one time-and this is just a semi-educated guess on my part-this was more pertinent to the wife and the children...so they didn't find themselves living in a grass shack on the railroad rights and eating out of garbage cans because the ex-husband/father only provided a pittance-or nothing. If a married couple wants to avoid "living in the manner to which they have become accustomed", they should simply aim for the lowest standard of living local ordinances will allow.

In fact upon divorce, I think the government should take all their assets, and auction them. And then, with the money raised, buy the couple a big cake with the following writing on it: DUMB ASS!

Believe it or not, I'm very inclined to agree with you, except I think that any children should be removed from the situation and placed to be raised by a 3rd party-let the proceeds of liquidating the unhappy ex-couples' assets go aid in that matter. Let them both have a completely fresh start, with nothing to their name. I bet we'd see the divorce rate drop like a rock tossed over the edge of a cliff.

I doubt he is interested in getting anything from anyone. Rather he is protecting his assets.

Likely that is true, but based on the information we've been given, an alert woman would be concerned about the possibility of being on the hook for spousal support because of the male having(on paper) no assets and no income.
I'd like to think that just about any attorney or judge would quickly recognize that this "paper" situation doesn't track with real life-but there's no way of knowing that for sure.

Until there is a contract which allows two people to be able to keep their finances and assets completely separate, a contract that is honored by the courts, regardless of cohabitation, marriage or children, I think every person should be concerned about protecting their assets.

I do not disagree with "protecting ones' assets". However, as the elderly lady with the prenup was advised, if the divorce left one spouse with a markedly reduced standard of living-or in some way dependent on taxpayers( needing food stamps, for example) the court might very well over-ride the pre-nup.
I don't know, x_file, if you have ever been married or in a cohabiting LTR, but while it looks good on paper, the concept of a married or co-habiting couple being able to keep their assets and income strictly separate, in reality, would be very difficult to put into practice. Unless they lived in separate domiciles that each maintained from their own income, and if there were children, each domicile would have them 3&1/2 days a week. Conducting their lives in such a manner would surely shield individual incomes and assets, but why bother to get married then-separate domiciles, separate finances, divided children-pretty much renders marriage moot, doesn't it?

With cohabitation, you enter the contract without written consent - which, in my option, should be illegal.
You mean that unmarried cohabiting couples should be tried in a court of law and punished for participating in an illegal act? I don't know, but unless your SO is holding a gun to your head, one could certainly refuse to cohabit,right? If you want to talk about unmarried couples,contracts, and legalities, why not just make cohabiting without a legal marriage contract criminal act?


I'm actually saying that people would need to be mature adults, and do the right thing when the music is over. Turn out the lights.

Yes, this would be the ideal behavior.But often when a marriage ends, there is a great deal of anger,hurt, feeling betrayed, and somehow or other money becomes a substitute for the love that has been withdrawn-the spouse that feels hurt/betrayed, doesn't want the divorce,decides that while one cannot force one's ex-partner to keep supplying love, one can certainly mount an attempt to TAKE as much "love substitute"(money/assets) as possible.
the whole "manner to which they have become accustomed" is sort of unrealistic, because when one household divides and becomes two households, as a completely practical matter, EVERYBODY winds up with a lower standard of living.
Cindy O
 MsMarcy30
Joined: 9/7/2009
Msg: 567
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 10:29:55 AM
The three reasons why some people get married are for love sex and money.
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 568
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 10:39:16 AM
4ms4me wrote.....



Mr yawn, I wil try to explain how you come across to me. It may give you insight and nothing I say is intended to disrespect you. First, as you have mentioned more than once, your pre-nup is a wonderful opportunity for someone and I don't really see that it would hinder or dissuade the right woman from marrying you. For me, generosity is in one's spirit and a truly generous person gives more even though they may have less. My sweetie is certainly more generous and giving than I am; I'm more generous than you because I'm willing to give away more of what's mine than you are.


No offense taken and I do appreciate the attempt at advice.

But again you don't know me and this small window into me can not even begin to show the real me.

For the right lady I would give my all in all things money included. However there is no way I am risking loosing my children's inheritance to anyone.

As far as generosity there again you miss judge don't mind being generous just not going to be taken advantage of.

Actually the equality in the relationship that I seek and offer is building together. Each can build or choose not to build their own personal wealth.

As far as the 50/50 with the opportunity to save she would have she could easily save more than she could get from a semi retired income of mine.

I choose to work I don't have to work and I don't work full time about 5 months out of a year is all I want to work.

It pays the bills and gives me spending money for extras w/o dipping into the assets.

I am sure your attempt is well meant but I assure you it is misguided.

As I have said I have had many chances to marry since my last divorce and my assest were not a consideration.

As I don't flash my money. My old truck is a 1999 Chevy one ton my bike a 2003 Harley sportster.

Hardly says I had assets. They liked me for me and a few just wanted a husband and any man would do.

I am not ready for that and told them so. In my racing I have ran to a burning car way more than once to save a fellow racer how much more would I risk for my wife?

Just not going to risk my assets for a 25% chance of marriage working. (third time odds)

There was one lady on here that took a stab at my personalty that in horseshoes I would say she had a leaner.

Not dead on but close.

She said she saw me as a thinking and emotional man you and others have chosen to see the logical side only and disregard the emotional side she saw in the same posts.

I know some seems to want to fix me....Maybe y'all should check yourself and see why someone else see more of the human side of me than you do,and what does that say about y'all?

My last post was on topic and didn't diagnose anyone. As I said before lets get back on topic and let me worry about my mental state.

Thank you.


******************************************************************************
ladyc4 wrote.....

Lambasted??? We are asking questions, we are pointing out possible drawbacks, we are offering the perspective of the opposite gender( without going back through the entire thread,my overall impression is that other male posters neither lambaste nor support you-or your plan.)


No you and others seem to want to diagnose my physiological state accuse me of greed bitterness and damaged.

And actually x-file though he has not endorsed my exact pre nup has expressed the same need of some type of written protection. So that is just more spin.



Now, I have a confusion...at one point you were stating frequently that your next ex would be living "rent-free"...but your current breakdown mentions a mortgage payment? Or is that HALF of a mortgage payment?


That's not hard to understand. The list was of money she could save the rent/mortgage number is the amount she could save NOT having to pay her own rent/mortgage.


Now, in this latest breakdown you do reference a rent/mortgage payment-or does this figure reflect half of a rent or mortgage payment? I realize that residential real estate prices and rents can vary in different areas, but are you suggesting that a single woman would be making a rent or mortgage payment of $2000 a month


Nice attempt at spinning my words but a 5th grader would understand the breakdown.

Funny no one else had trouble comprehending it.


Do you really think that a lot of women can't save money unless a man helps her? If she has a decent income and makes wise choices/compromises in housing and money management, she could save money in her own right.


Never said that those are your words.....I pointed out she could save more money in the marriage. The money she could save is over and above any other 401k IRA or saving accounts she may have already.

You do like to spin don't you.


I don't know about anybody else, but I would be very hesitant to marry a man whose kids owned his home, his business, his vehicles,a guy who apparently has no earnings and thus doesn't pay into the Social Security system.


Having trouble comprehending again I see. I work with the union all my taxes including FICA is paid when they pay me. The assets from me working are put in the LLC and the LLC pays my living expenses.

So again you are wrong.


I would be worried about tax implications, and if the IRS ever decided that back taxes were owed, no prenup would protect MY assets . I would have to hire representation to do that.


Seeing as there are taxes paid when I make the money with the union and the LLC has a tax return filed. Just how is that putting anyone at risk?


What I don't like is some of the potential ramifications.It ain't about the numbers.


That is because you don't want to understand it. You have tried to discredit the protection I have chosen from the start.

triple r wrote....

Oh, and btw, were you to be planning to marry again, would you be presenting your prospective bride-and her attorney-with a complete disclosure of the LLC thing, and the fact that she would get NOTHING in the event of your death,and probably would be evicted by the "owners" of your house and business? That since you don't get a salary, there will be no Social Security surviving spouse benefits? I mean, hopefully she will have her own resources, but still, complete disclosure would be the honorable thing to do. And I think she should be aware of your penniless state, she might hav concerns about having to pay you alimony in the event of a divorce-since you have practically nothing to your name. Hope her attorney cautions her about that possibility. What was that about protecting HER assets? yeah I bet. Looking to appear to the court as a pauper?

*****************************************************************************
These questions still remain unanswered and probably will remain unanswered to any potential bride!!

Deflection, avoidance and evasion are useful tactics to the person trying to deceive another.

Moral to story...people who are evasive either by using silence or anger as a tactic, have much to hide. Judge Judy knows this almost better than anyone else!

Actually these have been answered many times. A pre nup is not valid unless both parties have their own attorneys advise them on it.

The pre nup spells it out very plainly.

How about I copy and paste the entire pre nup here would that be non evasive enough for you?

Really why attack the other poster when you run out of valid points in the debate?


The average wage for a live in housekeeper in Calgary, Alberta is $22,366.00 per annum and she doesn't have to pay for food or electricity. Her annual wage is all living costs inclusive in the annual wage of $22,366.00 per annum x 20 years = $447,320.00. All of her income is for her personal use and she doesn't have to put up with the demands or abusive behavior of a husband. She will also have the benefits of the Canada Pension Plan upon her retirement and Employment Insurance benefits should her employer choose to divorce, OOPS...I mean terminate her services.

Those are the facts as they would stand in Canada........don't know about the U.S., but things are probably quite similar.

Always do the MATH ladies, it's part of the reason that men wanted to keep women uneducated or to receive only an 8th grade education in the 1930's and earlier years.


x-file has already shown this to be spin and a huge over inflation of what is normal.

I will add I don't need a live in house keeper. It takes less than 8 hours a week to do all my cleaning.

But lets look at some real numbers concerning paying a house cleaner.


Quote | Estimate


studio - $50
1 bedroom - $60
2 bedroom - $70
These prices include cleaning 1 kitchen, 1 bathroom, 1 living room.
Additional rooms - $10 each - bed, bath, DR, home office, TV room


MAINTENANCE CLEANINGS:
Take much less time than your initial cleaning and cost less because your home has been thoroughly cleaned and simply needs maintenance cleaning.
The fee is based on the number of rooms to be cleaned, how often we clean and the number of pets and people living in your home.

Prices average $50 - $80 for weekly and biweekly cleaning and $50 - $90 for monthly cleaning. Ask for quotes.


Now it is possible for to have a professional cleaning service to come in twice a month for $2400.00 a year.

That is a far cry from the 22k you claim is normal.


Indeed! Looking back over the thread, my question about informing a prospective bride, which could have been answered "yes" or "no"-or even "it's complicated" has not been addressed.


That has been addressed in the pre nup but to satisfy you...YES!
x-file wrote...

Why doesn't she know that to begin with? I mean to ask, why is she assuming or expecting to get something?


Exactly!

4ms4me wrote.....


Is the live-in housekeeper working more than 8 hours per day or 44 hours per week or 172 hours per month, because her average hourly wage would be $5.23 if her employer/your neighbor isn't requesting overtime.

Even if the room and board is added to the $900 per month, the most that can be "charged" is $341 per month. That would work out to $1241 p/m, divided by 172 hours = $7.21 per hour. Still well under minimum wage.
See http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pdf/fs_domestics.pdf for more details.

Is this housekeeper a foreign national, by chance?


Well under?
Fed. Minimum wage = $7.25/hr


Four cents an hour is "well under" the minimum wage?

ladyc4 wrote....


Well, she could "get" drawn into a difficulty with the IRS if they decide to qustion the LLC she married. She could "get" evicted from the marital home by the real owners (the LLCs kids) upon his death. She might choose to take those risks-love is a funny thing sometimes.


Both of these situations have already been addressed. You keep throwing them up as a red herring.

To try and white wash the fact you have no valid points.....But one more time there is a life estate for the lady. She can stay as long as she wants to in the house. The pre nup covers the way the house is taken care of and who is responsible for up keep. Both her and the LLC have duties in the agreement....you know the one she could choose NOT to sign of her own freewill.

Taxes are a non starter as the LLC is responsible for them.


I'm sorry, but the whole damn thing looks to me like an elaborate ruse for somebody to get the bigger half of the pie in a divorce, because he has no income and no assets.


Comprehension trouble again? I have repeatedly said the pre nup protects her assets as well.

x-file wrote....

If two people won't the sit down and figure out finances and assets prior to marriage, and write a prenup, which excludes assets, but also ensures certain assets are included, then, personally, I think neither should get anything by default.

In fact upon divorce, I think the government should take all their assets, and auction them. And then, with the money raised, buy the couple a big cake with the following writing on it: DUMB ASS!


Ain't that the truth!


I doubt he is interested in getting anything from anyone. Rather he is protecting his assets.

And to some degree I think it is the smart thing to do.

Until there is a contract which allows two people to be able to keep their finances and assets completely separate, a contract that is honored by the courts, regardless of cohabitation, marriage or children, I think every person should be concerned about protecting their assets.


Wait I thought c4 said no one agreed with me? You and several others have said the same.
Some here just doesn't want the golden goose of 50/50 asset split to die.


Right now, you mingle with someone in some way, and they might be entitled to a large portion of your all you got.

In Ontario, as far as I know, cohabitation after a certain number of months is basically equivalent to marriage. At least with marriage, you sign the marriage certificate. With cohabitation, you enter the contract without written consent - which, in my option, should be illegal.

And the best part of it, the definition of cohabitation is so vague that even with separate residences, finances, etc.. the court can still claim cohabitation. For god sakes, one can probably argue that just because two people went to the movies together, they are cohabiting.


And that is one of the reasons why I picked FL to move to no common law marriage. You can live together for 50 years and if you want to end it there will be NO WAY for either to claim assets of the other.

Just walk away or send them on their way.

UnixGrand wrote...


I'm not talking prenup.... I'm actually saying that people would need to be mature adults, and do the right thing when the music is over. Turn out the lights.


If it was only that easy.....Without a pre nup just who is the one to decide what the "right thing" is?

The courts and they just split it down the middle and hand the lesser earner the bigger half. Ask Jerry Reed!

How about some real fairness... Let the people getting married decide what is right for them. If they are dumb enough to want the government splitting their assets fine.

I'm just smarter than that!
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 569
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 11:43:57 AM

You seem intelligent enough and I won’t quarrel with your assertion on smarts, but I see the other half of your comment differently. I have some familiarity with the law in my jurisdiction and I feel comfortable that - even without a pre-nup - the assets my wife and I possess would be fairly and reasonably distributed.


Yes but from what I can glean from your posts you have a great marriage. One where each has the others well being at heart.


The problem, as I see it, is that the law is a human endeavor and the results can never be any better than the input. Too often people are not represented, misunderstand the law, are under represented (financial or choice of counsel reasons) or choose not to participate at all. And most of the time the end-product is the result of a default (no-show) or a half-baked marital termination agreement created under stress and misinformation. Decisions are rarely left to the judge.


I agree with everything you said. Let me expound on my statement of letting the government decide.

I wasn't referring to a judge but the laws that govern the splitting of assets.

In my opinion unless the two are on the same pay scale each making about the same money the 50/50 mandated split is not fair.

Brfore anyone crows and the difference between equitable distribution and community property states.

Know that in most all jurisdictions the split starts at 50%. No matter whom did or did not contribute to the assets.


As I have said before, most folks don’t have sufficient assets to warrant a pre-nup, and people with pre-nups end up arguing about the terms of the pre-nup: what’s included, what’s not, what’s it means, etc., anyway. BUT I will say that if both parties put some effort into creating a pre-nup and talking about a fair division of assets before a marriage, they usually have a better understanding of what’s at stake and what to expect at the end - setting the stage for a higher quality resolution/marital termination agreement.


Agreed but they are working to obtain them. I have accumulated mine mostly during the times I was unmarried. Hence my repulsion to giving it away in a divorce.

As far as the last part of your statement most times two intelligent people are informed it makes for a reasonable outcome concerning adversity.

That is the spirit of my protections to be realistic and informed to give each of us a choice if the relationship should end.

Allowing a dignified exit for both if the agreement is honored.

I other words to be civil to each other during a time I have seen little of that.

As my grandfather said a mans (persons) word is their bond.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 570
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 12:15:47 PM
Wait I thought c4 said no one agreed with me? You and several others have said the same.
Some here just doesn't want the golden goose of 50/50 asset split to die.

Actually, what x-file said was


And to some degree I think it is the smart thing to do.

"to some degree" is not what I would call "agreement".
My point is that the "50-50" split that ONLY HAPPENS IN 9 STATES, and the "equitable division" in other states, is that it is done so that the partner with less income-or a stay-at-home parent of either gender continues to live "in the manner to which they have become accustomed"-even though, as I noted,a divided household results in everyone having a lower standard of living.
In fact,you were the one who got all excited about a few women in ONE state,who were actually arguing that permanent alimony is very rarely relevant in these days of dual income couples, not so much against division of assets,which is the SPIN you were trying to generate.
But you wanted to make it out that WOMEN, in general, were campaigning against division of marital assets. When it was actually a FEW women in one state arguing against that state's permanent alimony law. In these days of dual income families, permanent alimony to EITHER spouse should be a rare occurrence only applicable in certain situations( a disabled spouse,or a spouse who remained out of the workforce-therefore having few marketable skills and a very limited employment history), by the couple's mutual decision. One scenario where I could see a justified long-term stay-at-home parent would be a child or children with special needs or significant health problems( the CHILD having the health problems).

You can live together for 50 years and if you want to end it there will be NO WAY for either to claim assets of the other.

Well, I don't know about that. What if the couple buys a house or other property together. What about large ticket items that the one who has their name on the paperwork, clearly could not have purchased on their own income alone?

If it was only that easy.....Without a pre nup just who is the one to decide what the "right thing" is?

That is where the "equitable division of assets(and debts!)" comes in.

No one is FORCED to take their asset division to a court of law...according to some of the information I saw on various sites dealing with divorce issues, the number of couples who actually wind up in court over asset division is VERY small.

And again, we are getting away from the topic of marriage in general.

While I can't state with certainty that it is mostly young people with few assets who are getting married, that is certainly the overview I get...when I compare the weddings I have attended, the number of them that were 2 young people just starting out, was much larger than the ones where it was older persons with accumulated assets.

Both of these situations have already been addressed. You keep throwing them up as a red herring.

No, some of the information you are now divulging has NOT already been adressed, or I would not have asked the questions. You spoke of an LLC owned by your kids, that the LLC owned your assets, and that you drew no salary from the work you do for this LLC.
And we've discussed your physiology?? Diagnosed greed? How, pray tell, did we determine that from your physiology-when


Human physiology is the science of the mechanical, physical and biochemical functions of humans in good health, their organs, and the cells of which they are composed. The principal level of focus of physiology is at the level of organs and systems within systems.
(from Wikipedia)

And actually x-file though he has not endorsed my exact pre nup has expressed the same need of some type of written protection.

I have not at any time, and I don't think anyone else has, come out and spoken against the concept of pre-nups in general,where they could be applicable.

It's ones that are overly complex/convoluted/complicated that are going to be a red flag waving in the face of any intelligent and reasonable person.
As for "comprehending" the rent/mortgage thing, if you are saying your next ex would be living in your house rent free, in the face of that house belonging to an LLC,any woman with enough wariness to agree with pre-nups is going to be concerned about living rent-free in a dwelling owned by an LLC-out of concern that she could be considered a "tenant on sufferance" without the usual legal protections that a paying tenant is entitled to expect.

I work with the union all my taxes including FICA is paid when they pay me. The assets from me working are put in the LLC and the LLC pays my living expenses.

Then you do have an income...and under the 'equitable division of assets',you could STILL be exposed to having to make some kind of financial contribution to a spouse who had a lower income.
And- if you had read unto comprehension, you would know that the "housekeeper" mentioned as an example was a live-in, full-time housekeeper...not a cleaning lady or maid coming in for a few hours a week.

How about some real fairness... Let the people getting married decide what is right for them. If they are dumb enough to want the government splitting their assets fine.


If you were reading unto comprehension, you would have noticed several mentions by various posters-or information cited from a web source-that there is a HUGE percentage of divorcing couples that do exactly that,without involving the government or the courts beyond the necessary legalities needed to authenticate a divorce.

Both her and the LLC have duties in the agreement....you know the one she could choose NOT to sign of her own freewill.

Of course, then no wedding will occur, right? Depending on the TIMING,that you have not addressed,perhaps that could be construed to be coercion.

Look, I'm being Devil's Advocate here...I really have no stake or personal reason to care how divorcing people divide their assets as long as my taxes aren't going to provide subsidies to a spouse and children while the other spouse waltzes away with the lions' share of the marital assets.
And again, to be back ON TOPIC, this thread is supposed to be about reasons to get married,not how to construct escape hatches and get out of a marriage with no impact to one's standard of living.
Because, the practicality remains, that when a household is divided by divorce into 2 households,everyone has a reduction in their standard of living. And the tax-payers should not have to provide subsidies to one household because the other household managed to evade equitable division.

As my grandfather said a mans (persons) word is their bond.

Indeed, and in the case of insisting on complex, difficult and convoluted pre-nup, be sure that the mutual vow "with thee, I all my worldly goods endow" is stricken from the ceremony. Which I'm sure can be done-"obey" has pretty much become obsolete, and I for one chose to skip the part about being given away, because I was, and AM, a person with first-class citizenship and self-determination, not a chattel, or piece of property. CindyO
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 571
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 1:07:35 PM

Actually, what x-file said was


And to some degree I think it is the smart thing to do.

"to some degree" is not what I would call "agreement"


More spin....what he said was.


If two people won't the sit down and figure out finances and assets prior to marriage, and write a prenup, which excludes assets, but also ensures certain assets are included, then, personally, I think neither should get anything by default.

In fact upon divorce, I think the government should take all their assets, and auction them. And then, with the money raised, buy the couple a big cake with the following writing on it: DUMB ASS!


and


Until there is a contract which allows two people to be able to keep their finances and assets completely separate, a contract that is honored by the courts, regardless of cohabitation, marriage or children, I think every person should be concerned about protecting their assets.


That is agreement I would say.
Just because you take a small portion of a quote and try to make it agree with your myopic views doesn't mean it happens in real life.


Well, I don't know about that. What if the couple buys a house or other property together. What about large ticket items that the one who has their name on the paperwork, clearly could not have purchased on their own income alone?


Then that is their stupidity as they have no legal standing to ask the other to pay for it.
And I do know about that.


That is where the "equitable division of assets(and debts!)" comes in.

No one is FORCED to take their asset division to a court of law...according to some of the information I saw on various sites dealing with divorce issues, the number of couples who actually wind up in court over asset division is VERY small.


Yes the amount that goes to court is small. However even when they agree is the split really equitable to the higher earner.


And again, we are getting away from the topic of marriage in general.


No divorce is a part of 47% of first marriages 65% of second and 75% of thirds.

And the topic is the reasons to legally marriage so I would say divorce and how to avoid and or get out of it as painless as possible is right on topic.


While I can't state with certainty that it is mostly young people with few assets who are getting married, that is certainly the overview I get...when I compare the weddings I have attended, the number of them that were 2 young people just starting out, was much larger than the ones where it was older persons with accumulated assets.


Which again points to the fact less people with assets are willing to do such a hazardous endeavor.

And even though they may start with very little if they are wise they can accumulate a good deal of assets in just a few years as my breakdown of saving prove.

So starting out with a prenup even for ones w/o assets is a sage idea.


No, some of the information you are now divulging has NOT already been adressed, or I would not have asked the questions. You spoke of an LLC owned by your kids, that the LLC owned your assets, and that you drew no salary from the work you do for this LLC.


I had already said in this thread I worked and put the pay into the LLC so yes they had be divulged.
You just didn't comprehend it or wanted to throw up a red herring.


we've discussed your physiology?? Diagnosed greed? How, pray tell, did we determine that from your physiology-when


Human physiology is the science of the mechanical, physical and biochemical functions of humans in good health, their organs, and the cells of which they are composed. The principal level of focus of physiology is at the level of organs and systems within systems.


I don't know you are the one trying to make the diagnosis not me I know better than to do such.


Then you do have an income...and under the 'equitable division of assets',you could STILL be exposed to having to make some kind of financial contribution to a spouse who had a lower income.


Nope I work for my kids LLC the job is how I make them money. The income belongs to the LLC not me.


And- if you had read unto comprehension, you would know that the "housekeeper" mentioned as an example was a live-in, full-time housekeeper...not a cleaning lady or maid coming in for a few hours a week.


And if you had comprehended I don't need a live in and it would be stupid to pay for one.
Surely your not suggesting all a wife is, is a live in housekeeper.

Because I know how long it take to clean my house and it is NOT a 40 hour a week job.


If you were reading unto comprehension, you would have noticed several mentions by various posters-or information cited from a web source-that there is a HUGE percentage of divorcing couples that do exactly that,without involving the government or the courts beyond the necessary legalities needed to authenticate a divorce.


Sure they do so why is it a problem to do it before the marriage occurs and the 50/50 split is not a factor in the negations of said agreement?

I believe that would be a stronger place of negation for the higher earner don't you think?


Of course, then no wedding will occur, right? Depending on the TIMING,that you have not addressed,perhaps that could be construed to be coercion.


Now how is this coercion? It is a choice. I promise I will not hold a gun to her head!

More red herrings I like the way you invent problems with things you don't like.


And again, to be back ON TOPIC, this thread is supposed to be about reasons to get married,not how to construct escape hatches and get out of a marriage with no impact to one's standard of living.
Because, the practicality remains, that when a household is divided by divorce into 2 households,everyone has a reduction in their standard of living. And the tax-payers should not have to provide subsidies to one household because the other household managed to evade equitable division.


I explained above why divorce and planning is on topic.

I have never seen the government have to do so. And why would it be their place to do so. Each person should have to be responsible for themselves.


Indeed, and in the case of insisting on complex, difficult and convoluted pre-nup, be sure that the mutual vow "with thee, I all my worldly goods endow" is stricken from the ceremony. Which I'm sure can be done-"obey" has pretty much become obsolete, and I for one chose to skip the part about being given away, because I was, and AM, a person with first-class citizenship and self-determination, not a chattel, or piece of property.


As far as I am concerned the vows could be.....I will stay married to you till I don't want to be anymore. Oh and I won't take your chit when I leave.

That is what they have essentially been reduced to anyway....Except the part about not taking your chit.
 UnixGrand
Joined: 5/9/2011
Msg: 572
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 1:20:44 PM
mjyawn67, and Cindy O could quite possibly power all the nuclear reactor plants in the continental US.
 woobytoodsday
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 573
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 3:00:04 PM
Unix, I wuz thinkin' they might should get married. . . .

 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 574
view profile
History
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 5:03:01 PM

No offense taken and I do appreciate the attempt at advice.

Yes, it was only an attempt to give you insight as to how you come across, not trying to define you as a person.

But again you don't know me and this small window into me can not even begin to show the real me.

Same holds for everyone, even the ones whose comments you have tagged with "misandry" and the one person who you've decided is brilliant because she said something nice about you.

As far as generosity there again you miss judge don't mind being generous just not going to be taken advantage of.

Being taken advantage of is perception to some degree.

Actually the equality in the relationship that I seek and offer is building together. Each can build or choose not to build their own personal wealth.

I admit, this seems contradictory to me. If I'm building my own personal wealth, and he's building his personal wealth, how are we building together? If it's my house and I'm making all the decorative/maintenance decisions, while he contributes nothing, how are we creating a home together?

I am sure your attempt is well meant but I assure you it is misguided.

I don't think you get it, but it hardly matters.

I know some seems to want to fix me....Maybe y'all should check yourself and see why someone else see more of the human side of me than you do,and what does that say about y'all?

None of us is any different in that we're both thinking and emotional people - yet I can't say I've noticed you seeing the "human" side of any of the other posters. What does that say about you?

Well under?
Fed. Minimum wage = $7.25/hr
Four cents an hour is "well under" the minimum wage?

In Ontario, Canada, the Federal Minimum wage is $10.25 per hour.

This'll be my last post in response to you on this topic, so I'll say I misjudged you somewhat early on and I've come to appreciate some of your views more than I did at first. Have a lovely weekend. :)
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 575
What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?
Posted: 6/17/2011 5:48:14 PM

Same holds for everyone, even the ones whose comments you have tagged with "misandry" and the one person who you've decided is brilliant because she said something nice about you.


Actually as you said I commented that it was misandry or a misandric statement I have never commented on the persons state of mind or personalty.

I don't think I said she was brilliant because she said something nice about me. Though it does show she has great taste!....LOL


Being taken advantage of is perception to some degree.


Yes and I believe most would define it the same when a person that has vowed to be by your side for a lifetime cheats. Makes plans to get as much as they can in a divorce for two years and even takes out a large insurance policy hopping I would off myself. (Her words)

Do I think all women are like this no....However I didn't think she was so I would err on the side of caution.


I admit, this seems contradictory to me. If I'm building my own personal wealth, and he's building his personal wealth, how are we building together? If it's my house and I'm making all the decorative/maintenance decisions, while he contributes nothing, how are we creating a home together?


I never said she couldn't make decorative/maintenance decisions. Just that if we stay in my home anything permanent she did would become part of the home and she couldn't make a claim on it.

As far as each building wealth on our own. It seems to me any person would want control of their own assets. I don't see where that is a drawback.

One of the main comments I hear from women is men are to controlling......This gives us both control over our lives and assets.



I don't think you get it, but it hardly matters.

Oh I get it. I just don't agree that I have the problems some here do. Especially when others (more than just one) has agreed that what I say is reasonable.


None of us is any different in that we're both thinking and emotional people - yet I can't say I've noticed you seeing the "human" side of any of the other posters. What does that say about you?


It says I debate the topic and that I don't judge the people off of one narrow subject matter. And if you notice I have commented on some of the posts with a human side.

Understanding that what works for me may not be for another is looking at the human side. I believe I even posted answers to you that showed that side.


In Ontario, Canada, the Federal Minimum wage is $10.25 per hour.

This'll be my last post in response to you on this topic, so I'll say I misjudged you somewhat early on and I've come to appreciate some of your views more than I did at first. Have a lovely weekend. :)


I have noticed that a few times laws quoted were from another country. That is a problem as when thinking about laws I think American as that is where I live.
Not knocking Canada at all but some of the laws I hear about up there scare the hell out of me. I am very much against socialism. On paper is sounds great the problem comes when you run out of the other peoples money to fund it. Plus I hate snow and cold weather....LOL

No offense meant to Canadians I have seen some real sharp post for you guys.

I have also learned from you and though we don't see eye to eye I see wisdom in your words. Thank you for a respectful and articulate post.
And I hope your weekend is great as well.
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > What Are The Reasons For Getting Legally Married?