follow Dan8267 following
follow Dan8267 2017 Sep 19, 4:19pm
3,311 views 61 comments
« First « Previous Comments 8 - 47 of 47 Last »
Then you can still get a temp/side job that your ex-husband - after the divorce is settled and the payments instantiated - not only has to find out about but also re-challenge the payments (which is hard to to) and you may likely come out on top by working less during your marriage.
Alimony is meant to make up the difference in your earnings potential that you sacrificed to stay home. It should work the same regardless of gender and if you know beforehand that alimony is going to be granted, then you can plan accordingly.
justme saysMen were always just units of labor and cannon-fodder. I read this exact phrase on Quora and it struck me as interesting but if men's product was being cannon fodder and women's being birthing vessels, then men's stock traded higher because they had the benefit of owning their wives.
Men were always just units of labor and cannon-fodder.
That is not how it works. if you stay at home and marry Bill gates-get nannies, private jets, trips across the world, unlimited shopping and if no pre-nup she gets 10 billion dollars.Meanwhile a woman married to a drunk married to someone who cheats on her and uses her money-while she supports her kids-has to pay alimony and split assets. In the world of equality, everyone should be responsible for themselves and plan accordingly.
It would appear you haven't considered women who are filling the position of site and plant managers in the petro-chem field. You also have overlooked women who work as operators/technicians etc. in the same field.
You've just described how it's equal. If both parties agree that one person should stay home, then they should be compensated via alimony. Consider it severance pay
jessica saysYou've just described how it's equal. If both parties agree that one person should stay home, then they should be compensated via alimony. Consider it severance paySeverance pay is determined by the company not by the person giving severance or a court under threat of jail.
The only countries that show decent wealth in the world are all capitalistic.
The problem could easily be mitigated by less women
Yeah, there may be rare exceptions, but I demand proof of such unicorns. You don't get that for free.
There are infinite number of alternative economic systems, almost all of which are farther from capitalism or communism than either of those two are from each other.
Lowering the people in the labor force is a shitty way to increase wages because it lowers overall productivity and the overall wealth of the country. Unfortunately, capitalism makes this the ONLY possible solution to the problem.
The points you quoted were interesting but they are byproducts of whatever his main thesis is.
But your point is that if I am very efficient and I worked 90 hours a week
I'm never going to be Taylor Swift even if I worked 24 hours a day! I think where we disagree is that since I can never be Taylor Swift, is the best way for me to contribute to society to give all my hours to my employer?
Husbands never owned their wives, the wives owned their husbands.
So stop with the flowery language and attempts at misdirection. Pretty much every substantial claim you have made so far is simply false.
I think you were implying that people who work long hours do so because they are less productive. In my observations this is never the case. The people who work long hours are always the most productive people. There are people who work to live and people who live to work. It's a personal value judgement which is better and only each individual can make that tradeoff for himself or herself.
Doesn't a pre-nup solve all your problems though? Or even a post-nup?
Women couldn't have credit cards until 1974.
There is absolutely nothing about capitalism, the control by owners over production and the distribution of revenue from production, that has even a tenuous relationship with economic productivity or the wealth of most individuals in a society. People who think capitalism is the mechanism responsible for prosperity simply do not know what capitalism is. Capitalism is NOT commerce, banking, currency, the creation of corporations or other economic units, payment for services render, trade, investment, enterprise, innovation, or free markets. Absolutely none of those terms have anything to do with capitalism. Hell, free markets and capitalism are mutually exclusive.Capitalism is one and only one thing: control by owners over production and the distribution of revenue from production. This is a very specific mechanism. It is not a mechanism necessary for any of those other things I mentioned, not even investment. And it is not a mechanism that maximizes productivity, wealth ...
You've just described how it's equal. If both parties agree that one person should stay home, then they should be compensated via alimony. Consider it severance pay.
Here's an idea: Give the kids to the father and get yourself out in the workforce / education system after a divorce. Then when you get laid off you'll find there is a huge diff between severance pay and alimony / palimony.
Women couldn't have credit cards until 1974.
And now look at the consumer debt problem we have. Almost every single woman I know needs to go to credit card rehab, but won't admit it to themselves.
If he gained his success after they were married, then I think it's reasonable to assume that she did support him in many tangible ways
No. That's just a stupid assumption. She could have been a horrible bitch to him for years and he may have become successful nonetheless. This is not rare.
There is a solution to the problem: co-parenting with with men who can afford to pay for multiple children, instead of marriage,