Reply to Pendente Lite Guideline vs Actual Spousal Support (in VA) -- How did it compare in your case? SAHM

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Pendente Lite Guideline vs Actual Spousal Support (in VA) -- How did it compare in your case? SAHM"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Yikes at this thread. Never get married fellas![/quote]

This thread and all the others on here. Financial predators.[/quote]

Then don’t. Don’t have kids, don’t get married, go play XBox. No one needs you. [/quote]

Interesting how some grown women think that they should be taken care of financially. Be a feminist and get a job.[/quote]

This is because you don't see work outside of the house as work. It's actual work. More work most of the time. It never ends. And yes stay at home parents have more time to shop and cook for you, take care of your kids (a nanny alone charges $15 an hour per kid around here), and pets, clean your room and do your laundry. Handle finances and pay taxes, and handle appointments and vacation planning. Buy gifts. Coordinate friend get-togethers. This is also why men want another women right after. They know they don't want to handle this work. But it's actual work. There are actually ways you can outsource this stuff and you can see how it all adds up financially.[/quote]

I’m a WOHM. You need to be a bit more objective. The childcare part, yes. You covered — his half. You would have had to cover your half from your paycheck if you worked because it’s your child also. So take that $15 and make it $7.50. The rest of the stuff WOHMs do too. You think someone else buys the gifts? Plans the vacations and holidays? I’m folding a load of laundry every other night.

It is not a good financial deal for women to SAH. Not for the husband, not for the wife. There are other intangibles but if you get divorced recognize you had the privilege of not working for many years and that’s what it was. I am not saying there should not be child support and bridge alimony. But a man is not a plan. You can’t plan to live off someone else’s job and never support yourself in life.[/quote]

100% this.[/quote]

I 100% recognize this now but I didn't at the time. Since that is the situation, [b]should I forever be up against a financial wall?[/b] My earning potential suffered while he never had to miss a meeting, a work dinner,  or a business trip.  His continued to contribute to retirement while I stayed at home. I took a job earning the same amount as I was making 8 years prior when I left the workforce. I'm happily working full-time now and would not expect spousal support but what about the 1/2 of the retirement contributions and interest for the period that I was at home?[/quote]

Yes, that’s what you chose when you decided to SAH. I’m not being mean, that’s just life. It’s a trade off and the woman assumes a lot of the risk in that scenario. I would never recommend it to my daughter unless she had a great prenup and even then — why? Life is uncertain, don’t put your eggs in one basket.

It is always important for women to look out for themselves. Many women sell themselves down the river for a Hallmark card slogan one day of the year. If it was such a good deal to stay at home and so valuable and important, men would do it.[/quote]

I mean sort of except alimony DOES exist for women who make this choice, and rightfully so. [/quote]

Permanent alimony is only available in 14 states. Taking alimony means you're depending on your ex to pay. My only point is that it's a position of relative vulnerability, which is why you rarely see men taking it. Men look out for themselves. The whole thing is very tricky. I will advise my daughter never to marry someone who isn't willing to make career sacrifices to the same extent that she does. Both parents need to be involved in raising the kids, and both need to take the career hits. Otherwise you're taking a real risk with your financial future, unless you are independently wealthy.[/quote]

I totally agree with the statement above. A man who is not willing to equally sacrifice his career for kids is not considering his wife an equal. He should contribute equally even if she makes $50K and he makes $500K. It's not about the money, it's about considering the wife a true equal and valuing her work in the office and at home. 
My income was not that far from my exH when I was 25 ($85K at 25 vs his $170 at 30+). But when I took the setback, he did not and by the end of the marriage I had zero independent income while he had a $1mm/year. And he decided he was god and I was nobody, cheated on me and we divorced.

This shows in fact how much professional women can loose if they sacrifice themselves for kids and receive no support. [/quote]

Most wives are not "true equals" from the career standpoint and should not be considered as such. You are a case in point. You were making about half what he did when you started. Then when you got divorced he was making $1m a year. If you hadn't gotten married you would not be making $1m a year.  Your career was in no respect equal to his, get outta here with that nonsense.

"He should contribute equally even if she makes $50K and he makes $500K." -- another absolutely ridiculous example. These people are not even close to equal and it is absurd to insist that he should consider her one. If the genders were reversed, she was making $500k and him $50k, let's not even pretend she would consider him an equal. Indeed, they'd be so unequal that she'd never even consider marrying him in the first place.

The cold hard fact is that women don't want to marry an equal - they want to "marry up" - but at the same time they want the man to pretend she is his "true equal". Which is fine if that makes her feel happy during the marriage, but when it comes to making a financial settlement during divorce, nope, forget that sht, you were NOT his equal and you shouldn't be treated as one.[/quote]

I disagree with all you said. I was making 85K while being 10 years younger when he was making 170K. He had 10 years already in his career thus he was making more (and he started at 25 at $35K vs my 85K). If I continued working in my field and he supported me equally at home, his income would be $500k and my probably around $350K by the time of divorce. He would have never made it to $1mm as it took him to travel extensively (100 days out of country every year), meet with business partners, attend conferences etc. He had this luxury thanks to ME. If he was driving around our child to massages and therapies in DC he would have grown in a different pace and won't be an executive business owner. He would be still working for others, at a high profile corporate career.

Any man who thinks the way you think will be a "slacker" with household duties and kids and not a marriage material. I have friends where the husband is making 700K and she makes 70K and husbands still do their best to be with famlies[/quote]

You're just further supporting my point that you were not equal to the man you married. He was older and making more, so of course you were not his equal. That undoubtedly contributed to your decision to marry him. If you married a guy the same age and salary as you, then you would have been equal. But you didn't. And sorry, if he hadn't married you then he'd still be making $1m now. He might not have kids or he'd have them with a different woman but he'd be there. You are grossly exaggerating your importance as bitter ex-wives invariably do.

"I have friends where the husband is making 700K and she makes 70K and husbands still do their best to be with famlies" -- ok that's great but it has absolutely nothing to do with them being equals. And in those cases they are clearly not "true equals", the husband is superior to the wife for all that he takes time to "be with his family".[/quote]

You can turn it either way: he didn't marry his pier of same age either, as he didn't want a woman who is too much into her career and wouldn't make sacrifices for HIS career.
[/quote]

Yes but he was not and is not pretending you were his equal when he married you. He didn't want an equal and you weren't one.

"It's absolutely a team work that he made it $1mm/year." -- uh huh, no doubt you think so, but it certainly wasn't an [i]equal [/i]team as you like to pretend.

"statistically men who have a SAHM wives are more successful in their careers" -- correlation not causation. Highly successful men can afford to have SAHMs, while less-successful men cannot, but those highly successful men would have been highly successful whether they had a SAHM wife, a working wife, or no wife at all.

"Women take much harder financial hit due to child birth and career setbacks vs men, and that's a proven statistical fact" -- they weren't going to have superstar careers so the "hit" is knocking them from a low level to a somewhat lower level, and meanwhile they spent years having all their food, clothing, and shelter paid for.[/quote]

It was an absolutely equal team unless you think that me taking care of our SN child, co-sining business loans with him was not as important while him sitting at negotiations making money at that same moment of time.  And no, he did not tell me he didn't want to be an equal partner. For the first few years he was very supportive of my career, but when he realized that child care was burdensome he told me that I would step over his dead body for my work. And that HE was unhappy about me traveling and be unavailable. So I became SAHM.
You also have no clue: my 85K at age 25 in 2007 was in fact a stellar career start. You downgrade women in your post, but statistically women begin out earning men, when they are not tied up to marriage. Not my exH would not have made it to $1mm a year without a spouse who was willing to contribute her income into joint business. 
He was married before me, his first wife was older than him making more than him. It was a total waste of his time and salary as she preferred spending HER $170k on expensive cars, traveling and partying. His career took off on the 2nd marriage with a "joint pot" of money.

You are shallow and all about power and money like most men.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics