ZeroBonus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > CzarHC Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ^Tiger Woods should have known > > > he knew, read his prenup, she only gets $5m if > they get divorced why guys like this bother getting married is beyond me. Every b*tch they date is obviously only after them for money and knowing that, just date perpetually and mix it up. all that money buys happiness (and h@@kers) so why bother locking up the “sure thing” when you can just pay for it whenever you want anyway??? If you want companionship, get a dog.
akanska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > High divorce rates have nothing to do with > pre-nups sor expensive wedding- they have to do > with wealthy societies of spoiled, self-entitled > insecure women AND men who always think the grass > is greener and worry more about boosting their own > egos on a public stage than actually being a > family. > > gripe over Brilliant post, but I also have to say that it is also possible that people split up more because it is more socially and economically acceptable. It is probably better to split up if you are unhappy, and there may be fewer people in unhappy marriages now. The issue is walking that line between when to split up and when to work through it. On the pre-nup, don’t you already have to be rich to get one? I haven’t looked into it extensively but I was under the impression that it only protects assets you have before you are married, not assets earned during the marriage.
Prenups can apply to anything you want them to. Protecting assets that you earn while married is actually a big part of it. Without a prenup, your ex-spouse can argue that it was only because of their support while married that you managed to earn lots of money.
haven’t read the entire thread, but tiger’s wife is going to get alot more than $5MM when they get divorced. easily another zero and a long way towards another zero (maybe $200MM), i’d guess
Marriages will continue to fail in this country as long as the legal system sees this as a market demographic to prey on peoples emotions and make money off of fear and anger. Create an Arbitration Court for all divorces and make outcomes contingent on some counseling program. As it stands, as the States continue to recognize marriage as a legal contract, people will continue to treat theirs as the same.
Has anyone stopped to think that a relatively high divorce rate might not be a bad thing? If divorce was not a socially acceptable outcome of marriage, many people would be trapped in unhappy relationships. A high divorce rate also signifies that people, particularly women, are not too economically dependent on their spouses to escape from undesirable domestic situations. Perhaps a high frequency of divorces is symptomatic of a socially-liberated society, rather than one that is morally corrupt.
If u look on the bright side, 50% of the ppl don’t divorce. I will be aiming for that 50%.
Hello Mister Walrus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Has anyone stopped to think that a relatively high > divorce rate might not be a bad thing? If divorce > was not a socially acceptable outcome of marriage, > many people would be trapped in unhappy > relationships. A high divorce rate also signifies > that people, particularly women, are not too > economically dependent on their spouses to escape > from undesirable domestic situations. Perhaps a > high frequency of divorces is symptomatic of a > socially-liberated society, rather than one that > is morally corrupt. It is not indicative of economically independent women. They receive alimony in most cases after the divorce regardless of whether they contributed to the increase in income of their spouse. Granted this is a 2 way street and can apply to men as well. In some cases, men will actually be denied a request to verify a child’s paternity test in cases of infidelity and be forced to pay child support.
Prenups make a lot of sense for second marriages, particularly if there are existing children with interests to protect. Maybe one should check out the market for pre-owned partners.
There are things money can’t buy. For everything else there’s Mastercard. 
Enough said.
I am getting married this Sunday.
Congrats Joe!
AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you spend $100k on a wedding and knowing that > 50% of the chance it will fail… > > Your payoff or economic benefit is only $50k… > > Not to mention you may spend additional money on > divorce lawyers, etc. That isn’t true, your assuming the payoff matrix is for the future husband of the bride. The payoff matrix is evaluated across many different parties (father of the bride, for example). Thus, each participant in the game has their own unique payoff with different goals. The father of the bride’s goal, to get the daughter out of the house, might be different than the best man’s or from the husband. Besides, future costs and benefits are discounted to the present, so the immediate benefit (a happy wife, in the case of the father in law, or a happy bride, in the case of a husband). For example, the possibility of a future failure may not be a parameter in the father of the brides equation, his may look like: A. what I get if I pay for the wedding. B. What I get if I don’t pay for wedding. So, many different players all with different reasons are all playing different games with different rules and different payoffs.
How many of the people here talking about marriage in a purely economic way have been laid?
CzarHC Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How many of the people here talking about marriage > in a purely economic way have been laid? Now that is a stat we can all rely on. FYI its 0% of them
^Sorry to disappoint, I’ve banged more than few chicks badly. PS Getting laid regularly is perhaps the dumbest reason to get married.
JOE2010 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am getting married this Sunday. Congrats man!
CzarHC Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How many of the people here talking about marriage > in a purely economic way have been laid? In the bay area, you have to look at even dating in an economic sense. Plenty of gals out here who go out to the bars with zero cash and get suckers to buy them drinks all night to go home with their gal pals. Cab driver once told me if guys know what gals said about them, they would never buy another drink for anyone.
BizBanker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In the bay area, you have to look at even dating > in an economic sense. Plenty of gals out here who > go out to the bars with zero cash and get suckers > to buy them drinks all night to go home with their > gal pals. Cab driver once told me if guys know > what gals said about them, they would never buy > another drink for anyone. Really? What made Bay Area girls in such hot demand? Good looking? Rich? or Just a pure demand and supply?
I don’t think this behavior is unique to the Bay Area…