Largest prize for ex wife in history.

  • Thread starter Deleted member 457759
  • Start date
SleepyBoy said:
yes i understand that, but a term like "earned" should never be thrown around when it comes to the what the wife is getting. This is what she is entitled to, it's an entitlement, that any women with any set of skills could of got just by marrying lucky.

an ex should never try to justify half by earning it, but they should just say "im legally entitled to your earnings because we entered in a contract."

She essentially got rich by dating and marrying the right guy, nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

Yea, that is the entire idea of marriage, you know, two becoming one, till death do you part. When you say "I do" it means to the death or if you break that sort of contract it means half.
 
So it's not unusual for a spouse to get half of marital assets after a divorce. What you guys are really (!) upset about is a rich guy got treated the same as regular people. What's the alternative? Maybe a separate set of laws for the rich?
 
MusterX said:
Yea, that is the entire idea of marriage, you know, two becoming one, till death do you part. When you say "I do" it means to the death or if you break that sort of contract it means half.
Click to expand...
But it's not the idea of marriage, nothing to do with anything after you say I do. you're talking about the marriage contract, nothing to do with the marriage itself.

It's just weird to me that the contract requires nothing other than saying I do in order to get half.

It doesn't require being a good wife or a mother. Hell, she could walk away the next day after the marriage and demand half.

I understand all of what you guys are saying, and that is the way it is.

It just seems odd, because usually a contract has some type of rule or stipulation. Usually a contact requires person a to do X, in order to get Y from person B.
In a marriage contract (one without a prenup)there are no rules to the contract, there are no stipulations, conditions, or anything else for that matter. Essentially it's a contract with one sentence. If one person decides they no longer want to be in the contract, all parties who agreed to the contract split all their assets in half.

I couldn't imagine this legal contract flying in any other circumstance.


Of course i am talking about marriage as purely a contract and what it entitles it too when one party wants to abandon the contract.
Marriage is so much more than that, and i guess that's my whole point.
 
A Psych Major said:
Without putting much thought into it it seems kind of ridiculous to me. I think there should be a cap on how much a person can receive in a divorce, something like $100 million. If you're not happy with $100 million then just kill yourself.



Kind of reminds me of Hillary Clinton except she's actually attractive.
Click to expand...

That runs contrary to the idea of marriage though. Marriage means what is mine is yours and what is yours it is mine. The agreement is to the death but like a bad BJ Penn fight it doesn't go to the death for most people so the penalty is half.

I honestly think the divorce rate is so high these days because people don't even stop to think what marriage actually means and is. Its a contract signed to the death where oaths are uttered and paper is signed.
 
SleepyBoy said:
But it's not the idea of marriage, nothing to do with anything after you say I do. you're talking about the marriage contract, nothing to do with the marriage itself.

It's just weird to me that the contract requires nothing other than saying I do in order to get half.

It doesn't require being a good wife or a mother. Hell, she could walk away the next day after the marriage and demand half.

I understand all of what you guys are saying, and that is the way it is.

It just seems odd, because usually a contract has some type of rule or stipulation. Usually a contact requires person a to do X, in order to get Y from person B.
In a marriage contract (one without a prenup)there are no rules to the contract, there are no stipulations, conditions, or anything else for that matter. Essentially it's a contract with one sentence. If one person decides they no longer want to be in the contract, all parties who agreed to the contract split all their assets in half.

I couldn't imagine this legal contract flying in any other circumstance.


Of course i am talking about marriage as purely a contract and what it entitles it too when one party wants to abandon the contract.
Marriage is so much more than that, and i guess that's my whole point.
Click to expand...

Marriage can be annulled within so many days or months so she can't just leave 1 day later and get half. Also its not a contract with one sentence, vows are taken in front of witnesses. for better or worse, in sickness and in health, till death do us part, etc. etc. and in fact sometimes the vows are exceptionally long.

Yea, you really shouldn't get married if you just think its a friendly agreement because you dig her alot.
 
MusterX said:
That runs contrary to the idea of marriage though. Marriage means what is mine is yours and what is yours it is mine. The agreement is to the death but like a bad BJ Penn fight it doesn't go to the death for most people so the penalty is half.
Click to expand...
That's a good point and I'm sure this oligarch will survive with his meager $4.5 billion.
I honestly think the divorce rate is so high these days because people don't even stop to think what marriage actually means and is. Its a contract signed to the death where oaths are uttered and paper is signed.
Click to expand...

Marriage is different nowadays. It seems to me marriage was less about love and more about things like social standing and financial security before, things that didn't change even if the love faded(or was never there in the first place). Nowadays marriage is all about love(or in some cases lust) so when that's gone the marriage falls apart. Also divorce has less stigma attached to it and marriage is more equitable today so women have the power to call an end to marriage should they feel dissatisfied, something that I'm sure wasn't the case 75 years ago.

When I was in high school I had an English teacher who was in her 60s. She told us her parents were married for 70 years and they hated every minute of it but they're were Catholics from forever ago so divorce was not an option.

Also fuck you for the jab at BJ, he'll finish Edgar and then he's coming for the FW title when Jose moves up! Nova Uniao will have the BW, FW, and LW titles! War BJ, war Nova Uniao!
2vw5qhg.jpg
 
Heh, I like Penn man. My point was that marriage is an agreement to the death. Sounds corny but it is what it is. The penalty for breaking that is huge. Maybe people should specify that they don't believe it is to the death but not even sure if the law would recognize the changing of the vows.
 
MusterX said:
Marriage can be annulled within so many days or months so she can't just leave 1 day later and get half. Also its not a contract with one sentence, vows are taken in front of witnesses. for better or worse, in sickness and in health, till death do us part, etc. etc. and in fact sometimes the vows are exceptionally long.
.
Click to expand...

Are you suggestion that the vows during the marriage ceremony are legally binding? That to "honor, cherish,... be faithful" is a measurable thing, and that by not upholding the vows that legally absolves the other person from the contract?

No of course not. which brings me to my original point, that how a person acts during the marriage whether they're an angel or a devil doesn't matter in the slightest because legally the courts are only concerned with dividing the assets once one person decides they want to abandon the contract.

It can't be to death due us part and before that. I've never heard a ceremony say "Until death due us apart unless..." If that were true, then the language of the contract is irrelevant and all that matter is dividing the assets once one person decides they want to abandon the contract.
 
3-F Rule

If it Flies, Fucks or Floats - It's cheaper to rent than to own
 
SleepyBoy said:
Are you suggestion that the vows during the marriage ceremony are legally binding? That to "honor, cherish,... be faithful" is a measurable thing, and that by not upholding the vows that legally absolves the other person from the contract?

No of course not. which brings me to my original point, that how a person acts during the marriage whether they're an angel or a devil doesn't matter in the slightest because legally the courts are only concerned with dividing the assets once one person decides they want to abandon the contract.

It can't be to death due us part and before that. I've never heard a ceremony say "Until death due us apart unless..." If that were true, then the language of the contract is irrelevant and all that matter is dividing the assets once one person decides they want to abandon the contract.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, I guess I'm being dense. Marriage has always been viewed as to the death and the law agrees which is why the penalty is half your shit.


Go ahead and tell your woman you don't think she is entitled to half. Video tape it so I can see the hilarity that ensues. :D
 
I've had the half discussion with the wife a few times.

The funny thing is; she is completely incapable of seeing how a man, in the opposite situation, should get anything. ANYTHING.
 
MusterX said:
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, I guess I'm being dense. Marriage has always been viewed as to the death and the law agrees which is why the penalty is half your shit.


Go ahead and tell your woman you don't think she is entitled to half. Video tape it so I can see the hilarity that ensues. :D
Click to expand...

I will admit im all over the place.
My point is basically Marriage is an awesome and sacred thing, but marriage contracts are cold legal instruments.

I also don't like it when context is removed from the situation. Which Divorce settlements oftentimes are.


I get so excited thinking about marrying my girl, but kinda scared when i think of it as a legal contract.

Turns out since she makes more than me, she is open to hearing about her getting more than half. She is getting ready to start a business, one which was her brainchild. I don't think I should be entitled to half her company in a few years if i decide i fell out of love with her and wanted to dump her for someone younger and use the assets that she accumulated through her hard work to fund my escapades. That would be a crummy thing to do, but happens all the time in divorce because the actions during a marriage don't matter since the contract is essentially "half, no matter what" (with a few extreme exceptions)
 
VulgarSnaps said:
I've had the half discussion with the wife a few times.

The funny thing is; she is completely incapable of seeing how a man, in the opposite situation, should get anything. ANYTHING.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Women101 bro. My wife at least would be satisfied with half and by half I mean half plus some other perks and assets that equals more than half. :icon_chee
 
Of course.

It's the house, the car, everything in it, and then half.

Once I figured out there was no point to argue anything abstract with my wife it became really fun to fuck with her.
 
SleepyBoy said:
I will admit im all over the place.
My point is basically Marriage is an awesome and sacred thing, but marriage contracts are cold legal instruments.

I also don't like it when context is removed from the situation. Which Divorce settlements oftentimes are.


I get so excited thinking about marrying my girl, but kinda scared when i think of it as a legal contract.

Turns out since she makes more than me, she is open to hearing about her getting more than half. She is getting ready to start a business, one which was her brainchild. I don't think I should be entitled to half her company in a few years if i decide i fell out of love with her and wanted to dump her for someone younger and use the assets that she accumulated through her hard work to fund my escapades. That would be a crummy thing to do, but happens all the time in divorce because the actions during a marriage since the contract is essentially "half, no matter what" (with a few extreme exceptions)
Click to expand...


Marriage is a scary thing which is why people get cold feet at the last second. Think of her getting fat and lazy, would you stay with her? What if she got a mental illness and was batshit crazy, would you stay with her? What if she just decided one day that she couldn't stand you and talked shit to you all the time, would you stay with her then?

If the answer to any of those questions is no, then I would recommend you don't get married. Marriage is for a long ass time, and people change. Its really a marathon to see who can outlive the other one. :icon_lol:
 
He should convert all this money into bitcoin and store it on the deepweb somewhere.
 
You're a terrible salesman for marriage =)
 
It's not complicated. When you are married, it's not "his" money. It's joint money. It's no more "his" money than the funds held by a corporation he heads up is "his" money.

Unless you come INTO a marriage with money and segregate it, or you have a prenup, that's how it works.

Totally legit IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Crime Gambian ex-minister on trial in Switzerland for crimes against humanity
Replies
0
Views
180
LeonardoBjj
LeonardoBjj
LeonardoBjj
Social Harvard applications drop for second year in a row after turmoil on campus
Replies
3
Views
207
HereticBD
HereticBD

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,073
Messages
55,465,477
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top