How you know that?? |
Sounds like he cheated on her? Creep. |
It was in the reports that were released about their court battle over money. Allegedly. I didn't actually read the reports, just the reporting of what was in the reports! I googled it but can't find what I originally saw. I mis-remembered her net worth - she says 6.5M not 4M. Here is an article with the same number "The Dixie Chicks singer says she currently has $4,476,258 in real and personal property, $121,205 in stocks/bonds and $1,943,452 in cash and checking accounts for a grand total of $6,540,915. Maines lists her current average monthly income as zero, saying she did not tour last year and "is not touring in 2019." She says her income has been substantially reduced while not on tour. In the documents, Natalie Maines lists her monthly expenses, including $23k on her mortgage, $3k on repairs, $3,249 for groceries/eating out, $2,291 on entertainment, $694 on clothes, $416 on charity... and a grand total of monthly expenses at $49,767." |
I didn't get that from the song. Did you see that somewhere? |
You do if you over-extend yourself. And at the time she and he were making equal money. Her career and albums took off post-2000 while he stayed a sometimes supporting actor. She also owns or owned pre-divorce 3 homes, not just one. 1 in LA, 1 in Austin, and 1 in NYC. |
It sounded like he wanted the divorce. Maybe she cheated? |
That is extremely stingy charitable giving for someone with her wealth. |
The song says something about she knows what he did on her boat and he can go off with his own someone new? |
Agreed. |
They have been divorced for two years so I took it as the someone new was just the next girlfriend... |
The shade! I love it! |
At one point, the kids came on tour with them. And their son played at some of the DCX shows. He just sounds like a jerk. He wasn't manipulated into a prenup. They're both professional entertainers with potential to make big bucks. He made an agreement with full capacity to understand it, and then went back on what he agreed to. Destroys his credibility. |
The same can be said of a woman with a law degree or a nurse or a pet washer who decided to get married, had kids, and 'suddenly' doesn't want to work for 5-10 years. She went back on her agreement to work and provide an income for herself -- so why should she then benefit from the largesse of the working spouse in a divorce? |
This is an interesting perspective. If I understand you correctly, you believe that if a woman who has potential to make good money (maybe she was lawyer) makes a personal choice to stay at home or follow her husband's career - then she shouldn't be entitled to any alimony or child support. I am sure many others agree with you. The courts generally don't. The court awarded him 350,000 in legal fees that she had to pay so there was something to the case he brought forward. I am not sure it was ever disclosed what the final ruling was in terms of alimony / child support she needed to pay. |
I agree also. What's that saying - best revenge is a life well lived? This is kind of pathetic, which makes me sad because I like the DC's. |