TiredMan Posted February 1, 2007 Author Share Posted February 1, 2007 I would play hardball too if I was that person. I've never been divorced but I do know they can get nasty. There are people out there that if you bring up a pre-nup, they are appalled by it. My opinion is forget them. If one person is rich and the other was not, why would they be entitled to half that money? What did they do to earn it besides say "i do?" You even have lawsuits from people who aren't married saying that "we weren't married but so and so promised me this". It's beyond absurd. Link to comment
AwdreeHpburn Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I think part of the problem is romantic idealism versus practical reality. I don't think there's a clearer explanation than DN's. Link to comment
shikashika Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 A good friend of mine a guy..who is happily married to another good friend of mine said to me over the weekend " if you are considering getting a prenup... you should really re-consider getting married" In my friend's, parents' marriages, where i see the MOST commitment to marriage..there was no pre-nup signed. In my friends relationships where I see problems already before the marriage.. they are talking about marriages and who pays for this and who pays for that.. when you marry someone you take them with as much or little money as they have.. not this "this is mine... this is yours' type of attitude.. Take on their debts.. take on their mortgages... student loans etc.. I wouldnt' marry someone if he wants a pre-nup... too much of a different set of value systems for me Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 1, 2007 Author Share Posted February 1, 2007 Marriage is a contract. Why not just "be together" then? When any contract, you want to protect yourself. I'm not saying if both people are within each other financially. But when one has a lot more income, then he/she SHOULD be protected. If someone refuses that in a situation where the other person has a lot of money and is trying to protect themselves, then they are after the money whether they admit it or not. Link to comment
Batya33 Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I could be wrong but I think in general you keep what you bring into the marriage as long as you don't comingle it with your spouse's assets or buy something jointly. I would not want half of my (future) husband's assets from before the marriage but I guess in a divorce it is fair to look at the couple's respective incomes in determining, if alimony is awarded, how much to award . . . Link to comment
DN Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I could be wrong but I think in general you keep what you bring into the marriage as long as you don't comingle it with your spouse's assets or buy something jointly. I would not want half of my (future) husband's assets from before the marriage but I guess in a divorce it is fair to look at the couple's respective incomes in determining, if alimony is awarded, how much to award . . .It depends on the jurisdiction. And in some places where assets earned prior to marriage are not shared in a divorce that does not apply to a house as that is deemed to become a marital home. Link to comment
melrich Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I could be wrong but I think in general you keep what you bring into the marriage as long as you don't comingle it with your spouse's assets or buy something jointly. That's not what happens here unless the marriage is very short (less than 2 years). Even then, if one came in with nothing and the other $100,000, the one with nothing would still take away probably a minimum of $10,000 to $15,000. Link to comment
MissTee Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I'm all for it. You should be more smart than emotional when entering marriage. Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 2, 2007 Author Share Posted February 2, 2007 Too many people make out from divorce it's silly. My feeling is if you marry someone who is rich and you are not and you live a certain lifestyle, if the marriage is over you shouldn't continue to live that lifestyle no matter why the marriage ended. If I marry Sharapova and we divorce because she cheated, I don't deserve HER money, in my eyes. But I would also willingly sign a prenup because I don't have the talent to make her money in tennis so it should be hers and hers alone. Link to comment
ghost69 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 get one. if he/she doesn't agree, then you might want to question their motive. everything you build together after the prenup you split. ........................................................................................................................................................................................ Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 6, 2007 Author Share Posted February 6, 2007 get one. if he/she doesn't agree, then you might want to question their motive. everything you build together after the prenup you split. I would. Any woman who tells me "i wouldn't marry you if you expected me to sign on" is a golddigger. I agree with sharing stuff AFTER unless one person is significantly more wealthy. If I am a professional hockey player or something. I don't believe she should be entitled to what my god given talent has earned me. Link to comment
Batya33 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 I would. Any woman who tells me "i wouldn't marry you if you expected me to sign on" is a golddigger. I agree with sharing stuff AFTER unless one person is significantly more wealthy. If I am a professional hockey player or something. I don't believe she should be entitled to what my god given talent has earned me. Yes, and what about the work she does in the home so that you - the hypothetical hockey player - can travel, do public appearances, etc - that you would not be able to do - or would have to pay someone to take care of your life/kids - if she were not around? What about the sacrifices she might make in her career - less income, lots of travel - to be with a professional hockey player? Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Yes, and what about the work she does in the home so that you - the hypothetical hockey player - can travel, do public appearances, etc - that you would not be able to do - or would have to pay someone to take care of your life/kids - if she were not around? What about the sacrifices she might make in her career - less income, lots of travel - to be with a professional hockey player? Here's the thing. I would make that money without her. She would not live that lifestyle without me. In fact, she could keep her own career why not? If I am that rich, then I can pay for my home to be cleaned and so forth. By that logic, she would never be able to live a home that I would have if I'm that rich, so should she be paying rent? Link to comment
Batya33 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 Typically in the divorce cases I have heard about, the wife claims, successfully, that she supported her husband in his career to the detriment of her career. I am not commenting on whether that is accurate but I assume if there is no prenup, the one with the income-producing career could be vulnerable to such claims unless he hired someone to do everything a wife would do to support his need to be on the road a lot, etc. I don't think the argument "she gets to live in a bigger house" works especially if she is working in the home with children. Link to comment
ghost69 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 just don't get married. it technically is just a piece of paper that will screw you in the end. be 'life partners'. ........................................................................................................................................................................................ Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Typically in the divorce cases I have heard about, the wife claims, successfully, that she supported her husband in his career to the detriment of her career. I am not commenting on whether that is accurate but I assume if there is no prenup, the one with the income-producing career could be vulnerable to such claims unless he hired someone to do everything a wife would do to support his need to be on the road a lot, etc. I don't think the argument "she gets to live in a bigger house" works especially if she is working in the home with children. The courts always seem to favor women. It's like a subconscious thing. If a couple if fighting. And the woman hits the man and the man hits the women, most people would think the man is in the wrong and possibly the cops would only arrest him (unless the woman severly beats him up). My point is that he would have the career without a wife. Many players aren't married. But the wife would never have that money unless she married someone who makes it. Link to comment
Batya33 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 Let's agree to disagree. Link to comment
ghost69 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 lol bat loves that quote now. haha. anyways, women do get most stuff in court within a divorce. go look up some statistics on how much. ......................................................................................................................................................................................... Link to comment
Dako Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 Women often leave a marriage with kids to raise, so that imbalance has its reasons. If divorce is unfair, simply don't marry. Prenups aren't foolproof, and marriage is a lot more complex than it appears. Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Well if I am a pro athlete and my ex wife takes me for half my money (in the millions) I guess I could always just pay 100 grand for a hitman. I probably would, Link to comment
ghost69 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 nice ........................................................................................................................................................................................ Link to comment
Dako Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Well if I am a pro athlete and my ex wife takes me for half my money (in the millions) I guess I could always just pay 100 grand for a hitman. I probably would, Save the 100K and stay single, Killer. Link to comment
TiredMan Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 Save the 100K and stay single, Killer. Honestly? If I was in that position of being famous and loaded (athlete, band etc) I would make women sign 100 page waivers just to be alone with me. You can never protect yourself too much for golddiggers lol. Link to comment
Dako Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 I'm just happy if they leave me the last beer. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now