Alimony - Page 3
Old 08-13-2010, 11:12 AM   #41 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVS View Post
Yes but you'll find heaven soon enough. I usually hang around North Toronto you may find Heaven around there

YouTube - Babu... Very very bad
Ha!
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:13 AM   #42 (permalink)
Truth

Member
 
Cory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 257
Representing:
Default

Automatic, in the sense I was meaning, was just a force of habit, a traditional response, that if it were to go some other way, it would be due to some very manual maneuvering.

Automatic vs manual: if a man is going to get custody of the kids, he's going to have to do some skilled maneuvering, rather than just go with the flow, is what I meant.

But yes, bad choice of word I suppose, my apologies.
Cory is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:24 AM   #43 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,592
Representing:
Default

a few points cory:

1. you don't have to be married to pay either child or spousal support, so this really has nothing to do with marriage at all. in ontario, if you have been living together for 3 years or if you have a child together you may be liable for spousal or child support.

2. you seem to be saying that child support and spousal support are part of the same thing. child support is not a payment to the spouse or any new partner in his/her life, it is a payment to the child. you pay that money to help to raise that child, which is what you sign up for by having kids, not by getting married. you would want to support your own child anyways, regardless of what happens to your marriage. you'd be surprised how easy that decision is.

3. child support amounts are basically fixed based on the amount of the non-custodial parent's income. however, shared custody is a common arrangement which often results in the payment of less child support (because both spouses are incurring expenses for the children not just one of them). mothers are not guaranteed to get sole custody of the kids these days - many fathers have sole or shared custody. if your sister's boyfriend is concerned about the amount of child support he is paying, he may want to revisit the custody arrangements. these are almost never 'done deals'.

4. your point about spousal support is not entirely wrong, but it misses some important considerations. typically it is a calculation of many factors such as the length of relationship and the contributions of each person to the relationship. short relationships where each partner contributes equally do not result in big awards of spousal support. long relationships where one spouse gives up many opportunities for the benefit of the other spouse, the kids, etc. do result in big awards. divorce in canada is no fault - it doesn't matter who ended the marriage or what the reason was. if you demonstrated a commitment to support your spouse in the relationship, you have a continuing obligation to support them for a reasonable period after the relationship ends.


at the end of the day, if you don't trust your spouse you probably shouldn't get married anyways. sure, you can get screwed. it's possible. but you can get screwed without getting married in the first place, and the considerations you need to take before getting married and/or are all out on the table. many of us take these 'risks' because we get a great deal of unquantifiable benefit out of the relationship. i agreed to go all-in with my wife. we share everything. for me, that's what it is to commit to someone. we were together for 10 years before we got married, so i was quite sure. if you take your time, get to know someone, be madly in love for a long time and get married when you are sure, it's really not a big deal. your essentially hitched at that point anyways. but i don't think anymore in terms of my money/her money. it is our money, and i go to work every day to make money for my family. marriage is about subsuming parts of the self into a collective. if you want to be an individualist, then marriage is not for you. this is not a revelation. but for those of us that choose to take that path, that days of thinking only about oneself are long past, and you do what is best for those that you love. thats what a family is all about. if that family ends up falling apart, the commitment doesn't just vanish. too much of your lives are intertwined at that point to just make a clean break. you've depended on each other for years.

i see your post in the context of a history of anti-women/femininity comments that you have made on this site. the reality in this case, though, is that legally it applies to both men and women equally. all your point really says is that people who want to cheat and be nasty can exploit the system, which is true of pretty much any system anywhere. this has nothing to do with gender or marriage.
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:26 AM   #44 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

SJ's correct - the system favours the woman more often than not, in terms of custody and all that goes along with that.

Really what all of this boils down to is be careful who you choose to be with. If something happened between my girlfriend and I, we'd have very few issues because of how we are towards each other and how we are as parents. My parents were the same way. My mom made/makes more than my dad. I had a stepfather who also made a lot. In order for my dad to pay what he, technically, should have - the child support, braces, camps, sports - it would have put a burden on him that wouldn't have been on my mom. She understood that and was fair. Far too many people hook up with or marry people they really don't know and they're so surprised! when they get screwed in the end.
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:31 AM   #45 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,592
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superjudge View Post
Get the fuck outta dodge man.

The system is terribly skewed in the woman's direction, and I can cite about a trillion cases. This coming from a man who grew up with a dead beat dad never paying a cent.

Thats like saying "well there are black guys who hate whites, so nice try saying there's too much racism toward blacks"

You might be making a point that not all Divorces go in a woman's favor, but honestly, trane', don't be that guy ok,no offence but it's annoying because anyone over the age of 30 who has lived and heard and seen know that your scenario is so the minority it might as well not even exist.
what i meant was that legally speaking it is a two way street. the reality is that women and men don't traditionally share the same roles. men have tended to have the jobs and women have tended to be the caregivers, or, even if they are both working, men tended to make more money. this is a reflection of social roles and who is the primary caregiver and who is the primary breadwinner. with more and more men taking child rearing roles, this will change. big surprise sj.

Last edited by 'trane; 08-13-2010 at 11:41 AM.
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:34 AM   #46 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

When my future husband inevitably leaves me, I plan to take the kids, his money, AND the chick he's sleeping with on the side.



Ok, maybe not.
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:40 AM   #47 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barracuda View Post
When my future husband inevitably leaves me, I plan to take the kids, his money, AND the chick he's sleeping with on the side.



Ok, maybe not.
You will be consulting me re: your men, so there's no chance of that happening. I have high standards. And really, no man's good enough, so you best be loading up on cats.
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:40 AM   #48 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Senior Member
 
Superjudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 17,592
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
typically because men tend to have the jobs and women tend to be the caregivers, or even if they are both working men tend to make more money. this is a reflection of who is the primary caregiver and who is the primary breadwinner. with more and more men taking child rearing roles, this will change. big surprise sj.
Yes well when your day comes, you can say its a reality. As we stand today, it's no place close.

Thats all I'm saying big fella.

We don't live on paper, we live in reality.

Cheers Brother
Superjudge is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:42 AM   #49 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,592
Representing:
Default

see my edited post.
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:48 AM   #50 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aar_Canada View Post
You will be consulting me re: your men, so there's no chance of that happening. I have high standards. And really, no man's good enough, so you best be loading up on cats.
I don't like cats.
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:55 AM   #51 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,592
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
Brutal. Unjust.

With women like this, I think they are likely being influenced by divorce lawyers, and like most professional groups, lawyers will seek conditions that are good for business. What makes attorneys a little scary compared to say, engineers or salespeople, is that 1) they know how to lobby for change to the legal system, bypassing voters and previously established policy that secures more revenue for them, and b) what benefits them is often directly harmful to the fabric of society in general, and to children in particular.

I really find interesting too the bogus claims by the females seeking alimony that women suffer under divorce, and thus should be reimbursed. This is designed to obscure the fact that she is the one who filed for divorce!

Defenders of alimony too insist that a woman seeking a divorce should not see a drop in living standards, but it is somehow acceptable for the husband to see a drop even if he did not want a divorce. I would go further and declare that any belief that women deserve alimony on a no-fault basis in this day age is utterly contradictory to the belief that women are equals of men. You shouldn't need a prenup, these are atavistic scripts that should be vestigial.

How can women both deserve alimony while also claiming equality? Yes, in rare cases, high-earning women have had to pay alimony to ex-husbands, but that is only 4% of the time, vs. the man paying 96% of the time. I see little equality, just a lot of pretense.
you seem to have some expectation that the divorce settlement be related to the factors of the divorce, but that's not what it is intended to do. it is intended to balance out the fact that years of the lives of two people were based on a relationship of support, and that support made possible the arrangements whereby they agreed to support their family, especially regarding who would work and how much they could earn. if one spouse gives up a significant portion of their wage earning years and career development potential to be the primary caregiver, they put themselves in a huge hole for the benefit of their family. the divorce settlement is an attempt to balance that out. the problem with your argument is that you seem to significantly undervalue the child-rearing role and what that does to a person's personal development and career potential.
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:01 PM   #52 (permalink)
the gat'll killya quicker, when I'm drunk off the liquor

The Mara sisters are hot!
 
Bill Haverchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,926
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
you seem to have some expectation that the divorce settlement be related to the factors of the divorce, but that's not what it is intended to do. it is intended to balance out the fact that years of the lives of two people were based on a relationship of support, and that support made possible the arrangements whereby they agreed to support their family, especially regarding who would work and how much they could earn. if one spouse gives up a significant portion of their wage earning years and career development potential to be the primary caregiver, they put themselves in a huge hole for the benefit of their family. the divorce settlement is an attempt to balance that out. the problem with your argument is that you seem to significantly undervalue the child-rearing role and what that does to a person's personal development and career potential.
+1
Bill Haverchuck is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:08 PM   #53 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barracuda View Post
I don't like cats.
Sewing? Crafts?
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:10 PM   #54 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aar_Canada View Post
Sewing? Crafts?
Husband. Kids. Career. Big Macs.
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:21 PM   #55 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Senior Member
 
Superjudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 17,592
Representing:
Default

Rockets!
Superjudge is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:33 PM   #56 (permalink)
is praying Ross makes us forget Drummomd so people stop whining

Senior Member
 
jeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YO MAMMA
Posts: 73,918
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barracuda View Post
Exactly.

There's nuthin' automatic about it.

I know of a dude who got custody and all the perks cuz he could afford a better lawyer. And he was a bad, bad man.
It does happen but that's rare to say the least. The mother the vast majority of the time gets custody. Not always obviously, but I would take a guess that it's about 90% of the time. Personally I've never seen a divorce where the Mother didn't get custody.
jeffb is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:35 PM   #57 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superjudge View Post
Rockets!
Those too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffb View Post
It does happen but that's rare to say the least. The mother the vast majority of the time gets custody. Not always obviously, but I would take a guess that it's about 90% of the time. Personally I've never seen a divorce where the Mother didn't get custody.
You're right. Mothers, in most cases, do get custody. But I think joint custody is even more the norm.
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:46 PM   #58 (permalink)
pensive

feat. Otto Neurath
 
Ligeia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,078
Representing:
Default

I wanted to get in on this last night but had too much of a headache. Now that I've got a chance, most of what I wanted to say has already been said.

First of all, legal questions should always be framed in terms of what the letter of the law is, backed by important instances of precedent. We can all sit here and say "My friend got hosed by his wife and I've heard other stories of such and such" but that is nothing but an anecdote. And to be frank, there is nothing, so far as I'm aware, in any legislation anywhere that says women should receive preferential settlements. Now it is certainly true that there have been bad judgements made in the past, but by no means should we consider those to be the standard; unfortunately, all systems of justice exhibit serious flaws in making consistent judgement.

Second, this is a problem that you will face whether you're married or not; common law goes through the same challenges.

Last, I'll give my opinion on the drive to get married. My girlfriend's father, a Roman Catholic, tells her all the time that it is her duty to get married and have children. In his view, that is her role or purpose in life. We, of course, disagree, as we have no desire to get married or have kids ever (we agreed that if we do want to raise a child, we'll adopt, and we're both polyamorous). I honestly think that people like her father make life absolute hell for those who are single. By making "Straight married religious couple with children" the absolute standard to which everyone should be held, you're going to create a social context in which those who don't care for that standard, or who are incapable of reaching it (even for something as simple as infertility), outsiders. It's all about the battle between monism and pluralism, where one side wants to maintain order and control over the lives of others, another side wants to create a framework in which we can all seek our definition of happiness, and then a huge gulf in between of people who just don't care one way or the other.
Ligeia is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 12:58 PM   #59 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

What is marriage anyway? What's the point?
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 01:08 PM   #60 (permalink)
the fighter of the Nightman

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Cherry Bomb
 
Barracuda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,962
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aar_Canada View Post
What is marriage anyway? What's the point?
No, no. Don't ask that. This will never end, and I'll have to fight ALL of you who are anti-marriage.
Barracuda is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24