TTQ B4U

Fuck those local tax rates I'm sure....

Sorry Bro http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/145258301/original.jpg

It's future earning potential. I've enjoyed progressive promotions over the years with that increases in my income and thus that future earning potential will come into play. That's why I said earlier in the thread you can't just go out and take a low paying job and expect to pay far less. If I went out and took a $50k / yr job they would rape me for the difference between that $50k, what I am making now, have made in the past and am capable of making in the future. The reverse is true to however. In the case of a spouse like mine that is an attorney who decided to quit working. If we get divorced in 3yrs a court is going to look at my wife with an expectation of a certain level of earning potential when she re-enters the workforce. They will base that on her past earnings and earning potential she has moving forward.

What did you learn, don't get married, you're fucked if you do, or that my dog can lick his own balls and I'm extremely jealous of that. I learned that Jesse likely tried the peanut butter trick :gabe: Needs posted again: http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/145241729/original.jpg

If you and he fully understood the implications and didn't agree with them, then right there's it's clear you shouldn't have gotten married and made a mistake doing so or were at some point willing to accept the consequences. Either way, the contract was made and accountability will be had. No one expects to deal with cheating spouses, or legal issues, but again, those are some of the same things you need to prepare and protect against whether you're married or just living together. I use Jesse as a prime example as he's in a committed relationship and if they buy the house together, it will actually be uglier and more complicated should they break up if they don't both prepare ahead of time. Note I said BOTH. You're likely right. And I would imagine 99.9% who do get married can't tell you why they did above and beyond the blah, blah love talk, bs....and they most certainly can't tell you what they did to prepare for the end should it come. She doesn't need to be "around" for that. That type of benefit doesn't go on forever of course but during the time where support is paid it will. The reason is again, back to lifestyle and income during the marriage. Had the couple stayed together she would have benefited from his earnings increase and thus support payments will factor it in, especially if there's history of it. Example: I get 10% of my W2 dumped into my 401k by my employer as a bonus each year. If I get divorced, you can bet they are going to factor that repeatable bonus into the numbers should I be called on to pay support.

Regardless of her degrees, courts will look at her earnings thus far and factor in her potential. Fact is though, depending on her career path and given the fact that women still are traditionally paid less all roll into things. Again, with the "what I have done" me, me, me attitude....you don't owe her anything different than what you've been providing her up until you were divorced. I can't believe so many people don't understand that. You married meaning you became a team, not separate players living in the same house. You're joined man....again, more people need to understand what marriage is and why to do it. You didn't buy all those nice things with your money. Once you got married, all that money was equally both of yours, not just yours. Just because my wife carried our kids for 9 months and gave birth doesn't take away any rights I have as a dad. She sure worked harder in that dept. but it doesn't negate my role. Just the same, because your half of the team you were on worked harder doesn't negate the fact that you were a team. Again, the lifestyle you both enjoyed gets divided and doesn't go more one way than the other. You will both take a hit but she's not guilty and deserving of any less than you for any reason. What you enjoyed together doesn't end the day you divorce. It also doesn't go on forever. How long is your alimony term, 5 yrs? Prolly not that long. Again, if you don't agree with that then don't get married. Marriage support doesn't end cold turkey in all cases. Sounds to me like several of you had incomes with a significant difference than your spouses. Equal it out a bit more and things would be different.

In your case, there are kids involved and in those situations, it's not about you and how you are impacted. The courts are looking at $XX dollars coming in and what is in the best interest of the kids first and who is able to secure that best interest. They are then going to look at her and insure she's not in the street the day you are separated. You're fine, you have a job and are obviously the more skilled of the two, so just like when you married her and prior to the divorce, the courts are going to insure there's a fair and representative standard of living similar to what they experienced since the day you committed to upon saying "I Do" until the day of the divorce. How she spends the money isn't your concern nor that of the courts unless it's proven she's an unfit mother using the money for drugs or something. Otherwise, life goes on and she's just as entitled to raise the kids during her time with them as she see's fit. No different than if you were just friends. Someone asked earlier why is the legal system involved. That's why. So you don't get married, take a less than life equipped woman under your roof, pop out a couple kids out then for whatever reason the marraige ends and you attempt to let her and possibly the kids swim for their lives with little support from you. That's not the intention of the contract of marriage. Who is at fault plays little to no part. Would you be cool with the courts saying you only owe $200mo? How do you think that would impact the kids? The everything else likely includes health insurance? Things she obviously can't provide? If you're not the one to provide that who will? You said yourself she's not capable. Again with the self focus view....it's not about you man. You married that lazy piece of shit and played a part in her life and that of the kids you brought into this world. Like it or not, it's you have a role and responsibility there man. Sure you worked your ass off, but if you did it strictly for yourself then you likely should never have gotten married and had kids. You're not giving her anything. That money you're providing is to insure the those who you were responsible for during the marriage aren't left in the cold when it's over. That's not how it works man. It's a common comment from mostly men who are the bread winners but that's not how it works. The did ask you and you passed on alternatives and instead entered into a marriage contract. Her bed was your bed too and you had an obligation and for a number of years fufilled it. You can't wash your hands of that just because you get divorced. Especially when kids are involved. Their her kids too and again, the legal side of marriage is to protect the kids who are entitled to a mother, regardless of what you think of her or type of person she is. You don't get to strip her of that based on financial situations. It's not BS that the courts are forcing you to support her. You did it for years on your own didn't you? Look at all the people that walk into work one day and find out their out of job, benefits and companies just say fuck you, that's your problem, we're outsourcing everything? That's not much different.

You need the contractual stuff in place prior to getting clients and iPads, etc.....don't forget insurance.

It will boil down to more than just income but I see the point you're trying to make. Keep in mind what $10hr and welfare assistance really is though in terms of income, especially as a single mom sharing custody. You may think you were raked over the coals, but I'll take a good raking over the hot unfortunate mess she's put herself in. $777mo. for two kids isn't bad dude. Private daycare for my kids was $1,100mo each. No way I'd put them in some shitty center for less so just looking at what costs are to raise a kid to my standards and beliefs, if we were to have gotten divorced when they were younger, I'd eat beans and rice to insure the kids didn't get screwed in the process. It wouldn't be cheap but then I knew that going in. The sad thing about many divorces is parents fail to insure the impact and disruption to the kids lives is minimized. They attempt it but then immediate go to how it impacts them and the focus on the kid is then reduced. Ironically if they would have been thinking that way all along about their spouse and then kids they wouldn't likely be getting divorced. To be married and have kids is one of the most selfless jobs in the world when done right and as funny as it sounds can be a lot of fun. Come to think about it, it's just like my job

Okay so we're clear that you have emotion injected into the portion of an unforutnately situation that calls for no emotion.....a divorce is a legal proceeding and if you or heaven forbid an attorney gets emotional about those proceedings, you're as aobut out of place as I would be running in the Olympics. I absolutely see your opinion that you feel she doesn't derserve the amount provided to her by the courts but if you want to argue points, then you have talk the legal and contractual details of the case not emotions and opinions. Those do absolutely nothing but cost people more money. I think I've absolutely discussed the non contractual, emotional and religious portions of a marraige where appropriate in this thread. However, as noted above, this thread isn't about that. The OP noted he's likely entering into a legal proceeding and others have discussed simliar/related situations that don't call for in-depth talk about love and respect. Feel free to do so here but by the time a marraige is in divorce court there's not much love left and respect turns to disrespect or at best courtious treament....if you're lucky. No clause needed. If the above is what you want then don't enter into marriage. Stay in a friends with benefits situation and have agreements drawn up by an attorney on how you would like things to be laid out both in a perfect world and should shit hit the fan. That's exactly the advice I have been giving Jesse. Again, your friend and I will say based on what you're sharing, you too don't likely understand what a marraige entails from a legal or business perspective. You may not like my view on that and call it funny, but it is what it is and failing to realize that or address the details doesn't change ones misunderstanding. What that will do is lead to a lot of emotional distress and frustration. Ask your friend why he got married. It would be interesting to hear what he says. I bet most people couldn't answer it well beyond saying they were in love and wanted to spend the rest of their lives together, blah, blah, blah. They attest some type of "committment" but never understand the details behind what it means legally and then bauk when the accountability train runs them over in court. Thanks for the continued discussion. Just trying to be straight with you, not be a dick to you.

perhaps I'm alone in thinking that a 281whp boosted version of your car would make me giggle daily. Okay...now I see Jones' post....perhaps two or three of us would giggle. if others want 5.0l and turbo LSx power, there are choices for them too. a boosted BRZ however has some intriguing possibilities though.

It's not that simple. There are about 12 different factors that play into consideration when determining child support and alimony. It's not just as simple as who makes what and who gets what percentage of time with the kids. I would hope your attorney took the time to cover all that so you fully understand the details. If not, you need to ask. Sure, they both are used to the $140k lifestyle, but again, there are many factors in play here not just who makes what added together and divided by two. Both parties didn't come into the marraige with equal stuff, tons of factors changed their lives while married and thus to expect each is going to exit with equal stuff is not a proper expectation. An attorney will confront you with that upfront or at least they should. Her earning potential on her own isn't what his is and the contract of marraige isn't going to just toss her out to fend for herself with just her income and call it a day. That's not how it works. Believe me, roles are reversed more often than you think too. Niether party will see their results as fair and both will toss blame. The reality is both are responsible in some way. Wives don't just haul off an cheat, they do it for a reason that was likely not seen, ignored or caused. It's rarely just entirely one sided.

What do you think is short sighted? Living together as a committed couple isn't the same as signing a contract that holds each party legally accountable. I never said it was foolish just not sound business practice and like it or not a union of any type can and often does have implications well beyond emotions, especially in times of distress. Visit with an estate planner or family lawyer on the matter and you'll see plenty of reasons why the legalities of marriage are in place for those that choose to go that route. They will also be able to advise you on ways outside marriage to protect said assets for everyone. I figured as much but again, if you don't put it in writing or some type of agreement those extensive conversations and understandings won't do much for either of you should things go south. Just saying.....

oh...and congrats on both the anniverasary and house. just remember, unless you set it up otherwise, correctly, with an attorney ahead of time, if you split, you won't end up in divorce court fighting for the house but you will likely end up in civil court should the shit ever hit the fan. seriously, if you BOTH haven't discussed this ahead of time and met with an attorney before you ink the deal, regardless of how the paperwork is made out, it's fair game for possible hell later.....

Marraige is a contract, that's a fact not sad. There's a purpose to impose the protection for each through a marraige contract. If you're a religious person, it's typical a contract between two people and their God. The state sees it as a contract between the two people too. You're upset about a friends situation but he made the commitment to those kids and to his wife and did so with a full understanding of the consequences. (or at least he's responsible for having insured he had a full understanding) He's 50% liable and can't walk away nor does he have the right to impose how he thinks she should spend the money. Perhaps it sucks in his situation but IMO if he's focused on all that, his eye is off the ball. Go through the motions and move on already. You nor him determine what she deserves. He made that 50% agreement on their wedding day and like it or not each party deserves to have that agreement held strong. If you or him feel she breached the contract that's fine, but accroding to the very same contract in Ohio, it doesn't entitle him to anything different. If he doesn't like that then that's why the court system is there. Go fight. In short, he never fully understood the details behind a marraige contract. It's not that the contract is bad or the courts aren't upholding what it said, he just had a very poor understanding of how it all works or what he got into. Most have no clue and again, I hate to say it but most don't take the time to understand. (see my previous paragraph about people not giving a shit) People just run off and get married and pop out babies all the time with nearly zero clue as to what they are really committing to and then go off thinking the are entitle to this, that and the other. Part of what my wife really hated about being a family lawyer is 99% of the people in contested divorces thought they were family and contract lawyers themselves when in fact they don't even understand the first thing about either.

What I see here are a lot of people looking for "what's in it for them from marriage" instead of what if really offers in terms of commitment and accountabilty to the other person. Stop looking at it as if it's about you. Once you make a commitment to someone in marriage, it's no longer about living for what's in it for you or even the two of you as a couple, it's all about the other person. If both people focus on the other person first, you will both find happiness. Same with kids. Raise your kids that way and instill that same belief in how to view others in them and you'll be fine. Otherwise, you'll be in the pool of 99% of parents with selfish bratty kids giving you a hard time in the store as you try and look at buying shit for yourself. Kids get that attiude direclty from those that raise them. Marraige is more than just a commitment to you only. People do it in religious manners to bear withness before their God and to make a commitment in their eyes to God. They do it in a court of law to profess the same legal binding contract in front of society and the state who then holds each accountable to meet that contract. Many don't get married and claim to have the same strong commitment, etc....but it's not the same. Contract law 101, there have to be terms, conditions and consequences holding people accountable otherwise, it's not worth the paper it isn't written on and in the end, couple splitting up will still end up in court seperating joint assets just the same.

Why wouldn't something brought into a relationship between 2 people while they are together sharing things not be split 50/50? I don't follow it no being that way. They are Joint Assets not seperate assets. Your opinion may vary but for many people / generations there's a belief that marraige is a good foundation for society as a whole to engage in. Two people who care about one another, work to have common understandings/agreements, practice self discipline and raise kids together all wrapped around a commitment that again often is religious in some fashion but for the protection of each is also a legal business contract. Novel concept eh? IMO the culture of our country is falling apart and it's easily seen in the attitudes of the younger throw away generations that have a here today gone tommorrow I don't give a shit it's your problem and I'm entitled to everything attitude. The idea of tax breaks is to give a couple starting out a little something extra so they can begin living the American Dream or at least what once used to be seen and work for as such. Today people not only don't give a shit but are at a point where they don't even want to try to make it work so they avoid the whole damn thing. August 2 marked our 23 anniversary together so I'm a little biased. Marraige ain't easy, never was, but IMO if you're both committed then you should be able to work through just about everything. All depends on how much each person cares....and that goes directly back to my description of people's attitudes today. No reflection on the OP'er as I don't know them.

perhaps, but are you saying you'd rather live according to the law some 2,000 years ago or today? rhetorical as you can't go back in time. The reality is that the above needs to be that way. If the couple together has financial problems, then together they need to own them just the same. You can't go around passing the bad financial times off on just 1/2 of the parties involved and having them go belly up and then in turn taking the good only when it suites you. If one party can afford to buy a car or house or whatever they need, then that person should be paying off the debt their partner incurred and thus avoiding a bankruptcy or at the worst case be put in a 13 whereby they pay back the debt over time via a court ordered payment schedule. Having fucked up financial sense and poor credit won't be any more a benefit if you're single either as the bitch will drain you just the same. Real-talk. There are plenty of guys that go pussy poor funding a girl with no sense. You can call that a downside of marriage, but I'll take my case whereby I "married up" and have wife who's an attorney. :fa: Depends on the financial situation and what they each earn. Lots of variables so nothing here is solid in all cases, but in general if there's one solid bread winner and one that doesn't make much, they will likely file separately. Main reason is because once you calculate their adjusted gross income the disparity of incomes if filed jointly would cause the lower earner to lose some deductions. In our case my wife made as much and in some cases more than me so we filed jointly. ^^ not necessarily true. all depends on how you set up your finances. I have near zero worries about a personal injury or civil case as we have extensively leveraged our personal assets/property, cars, stocks business assets/property, investments and stocks/IRA's with protection goals in place including a foreign asset protection trust. Remember, I married a very smart attorney who knows very smart attorneys who focus on estate planning. Nothing we do goes without a strong financial asset and protection goal in place. Most all of our stuff is very well protected. No but if there's family involved and tough decisions to be made you're nothing to her legally to make those calls or fight her family who may have differing opinions on the matter. If you and your partner go to adopt a child without a marriage contract, and you split up, it will be no less ugly. I have money on it being worse. Getting the initial adoption paperwork worked out isn't where I would focus any concern. It's where things go wrong that you need to form protection for all. Not true. Have a kid and live in a "Partnership" with whomever you like, should a split happen it's not just as easy and up and leaving whenever you want. Marriage is no more a trap than living like you're married. Post 1991 you won't need to obtain a divorce, but you will likely be making friends with a lawyer and working out the separation in other ways. ^^ the same is true when married couples are in the pre-divorce stage. often times the kids have been seen as an expense long before a court orders the money be called child support. Depends on what you're looking for in terms of marriage and how you define a benefit. IMO if you're not going to have kids then there's no reason to get married. Just stay single friends with benefits that perhaps are more committed to one another in bed. To me and the wife we take marriage as a contract and live by our principles to raise our kids together. We've strongly leveraged our incomes and financial goals to achieve what neither of us could have done alone.

That first Lambo looks like it got laid by a Pontiac and gave birth to more moldings than a mid 90's Grand Prix. It's clean though.

Marriage is both a legal and in some cases a religious institution. The legal side more so in most every case. Not everyone gets married through a church or in the eyes of any particular religion. Even when they do, it's only official in the eyes of said church. In the eyes of society in America, it's the certificate you get from the state that tells them to change how you are impacted when filing taxes together, gaining insurance coverage, exercising hospital visitation rights, adoption, etc......

here too courts will not let you just up and move and try to play the resident elsewhere card. very common and often times it ends up costing you more to try it and lose.

(Details here are for discussion purposes, not nec. that of the OP"s situation) It's not about her income of $50k, it's about their once joint income and lifestyle having been $140k. You don't got through years of marriage where joint decisions impact the earnings on both sides and then just walk away each taking their own. That's not how a contract works. Not sure I follow you the joint custody thing.....there are two parents, costs are a joint responsibility. It's a lame tactic for fathers to want to forgo custody thinking they can walk away from the financial responsibility. The flip side is also common where because they have to pay they try and fight for more time.

He asked that I post this: http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg378/pdqgp/dog.jpg

Yep. (IIRC) it was Aaron that has one with a case and it was still lighter than my iPhone bar like 1/2. Little big for me to want to carry but then it's just so damn light. LTE too. I could see it causing me to switch at some point. Especially upon my next upgrade.

I'm often jealous my dog can lick his own nuts :no: