Marriage for High-Income Earners
01-24-2021, 08:59 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,071
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
Agreed that it may be a sad and pathetic subject .That, however, doesn't mean that differing views shouldn't be explored.
Homelessness?...sad and pathetic
famines?....sad and pathetic
hurricane?...sad and pathetic
Things like this should be talked about. More civil communication is usually better. Not to do so because the subject matter might be sad and pathetic is a recipe for future shock.
Homelessness?...sad and pathetic
famines?....sad and pathetic
hurricane?...sad and pathetic
Things like this should be talked about. More civil communication is usually better. Not to do so because the subject matter might be sad and pathetic is a recipe for future shock.
01-24-2021, 10:19 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,191
In a world that is as black and white as yours, am only given the choice or exploitee or exploiter?
If so, I will take the exploiter......and then IF I CHOOSE to be magnanimous, that is my choice. As opposed the the court deciding how magnanimous I should be
. It is all pretty Darwinian. Live or die, conquer or submit, thrive or wilt, exploit or succumb.
Why do we train for abnormals as pilots? Because things don't always go as planned. Why not have a plan when you are in the time bucket as opposed to the no time bucket?
Of course you will want to argue this...have fun with your self flagellation
If so, I will take the exploiter......and then IF I CHOOSE to be magnanimous, that is my choice. As opposed the the court deciding how magnanimous I should be
. It is all pretty Darwinian. Live or die, conquer or submit, thrive or wilt, exploit or succumb.Why do we train for abnormals as pilots? Because things don't always go as planned. Why not have a plan when you are in the time bucket as opposed to the no time bucket?
Of course you will want to argue this...have fun with your self flagellation
01-24-2021, 10:27 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,676
Originally Posted by velosnow
Sure, but that has little to do with finding someone to spend a lifetime with based heavily on financial 'what-ifs' right? It's not that it isn't of consequence but choosing a partner and where to live with said partner based on money and state divorce rules/laws isn't a recipe for success.
It's like those that worry about where to live based on state income tax and such. Who cares? Live where you are happy and don't sweat crap like that. Life's too short for such worries.
It's like those that worry about where to live based on state income tax and such. Who cares? Live where you are happy and don't sweat crap like that. Life's too short for such worries.
Making it not at all enjoyable to live there anymore whilst paying out the ying yang and no longer getting ANY return.
You know, like choosing the wrong spouse.
Sure, you can move and try to find a just as good or better place to live that won’t cost you so much.
Ex wife/wives? Meh, maybe maybe not. Usually NOT.
Choose wisely.
01-24-2021, 11:48 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,071
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
In a world that is as black and white as yours, am only given the choice or exploitee or exploiter?
If so, I will take the exploiter......and then IF I CHOOSE to be magnanimous, that is my choice. As opposed the the court deciding how magnanimous I should be. It is all pretty Darwinian. Live or die, conquer or submit, thrive or wilt, exploit or succumb.
Why do we train for abnormals as pilots? Because things don't always go as planned. Why not have a plan when you are in the time bucket as opposed to the no time bucket?
Of course you will want to argue this...have fun with your self flagellation
If so, I will take the exploiter......and then IF I CHOOSE to be magnanimous, that is my choice. As opposed the the court deciding how magnanimous I should be
. It is all pretty Darwinian. Live or die, conquer or submit, thrive or wilt, exploit or succumb.Why do we train for abnormals as pilots? Because things don't always go as planned. Why not have a plan when you are in the time bucket as opposed to the no time bucket?
Of course you will want to argue this...have fun with your self flagellation
01-24-2021, 01:15 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by LNL76
Whatever happened to marrying for love? Jeez, if you're going to judge a female on their bank account, hotness or fake boobs just do everyone a favor and stay single.
I've been happily married for decades.....to the same woman.
However, as pilots, we make a plan for engine failure on TO, and for 99.9% of the Delta pilots they never have to use that knowledge. For the approx 50% of the pilots that have been thru a divorce or three....why not at least explore the in's and out's of a plan in case things don't go as planned? I don't(didn't) plan on getting divorced when getting married just like I don't plan on dying tomorrow. But, some insurance, if it can be had, is usually a good option....whether its life insurance or a prenup. The discussion of a prenup will prolly prove to be entertaining(you will certainly know if you are dealing with an emotional true love or a logical one)....or quite possibly neither, once they have dumped you! Where ever that discussion goes, realize who you are dealing with(emotional vice logical) and accept it 'cause they prolly won't change.
I think one of the crucial elements is what point in the continuum you are on? Starting out and close to destitute or a middle aged millionaire? Buying a wife online at age 45 and a millionaire is prolly a bit diff than both people starting out and carving a future together beginning with very little.
JMHO....Jaxsurf....I think pondering this dilemma is a logical approach....don't let the emotional responses deter you...you are not selfish to want protection....only logical
OBTW...your title is important....you said "high income earners"....a lot off the negative jibes come from those that got started early in marriage as low income earners.....things change!
01-24-2021, 01:19 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by LNL76
Whatever happened to marrying for love? Jeez, if you're going to judge a female on their bank account, hotness or fake boobs just do everyone a favor and stay single.
Just curious...What do you think middle aged women find the most attractive in a future spouse?
and...
What do you think middle aged men find most attractive in a future spouse?
Not arguing anything here....just curious....open mic night...feel feel to opine
01-24-2021, 01:41 PM
#39
Junior Senior
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Whiskey Papa
Posts: 2,850
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
Just curious...What do you think middle aged women find the most attractive in a future spouse?
and...
What do you think middle aged men find most attractive in a future spouse?
Not arguing anything here....just curious....open mic night...feel feel to opine
and...
What do you think middle aged men find most attractive in a future spouse?
Not arguing anything here....just curious....open mic night...feel feel to opine
Of course there are women gold diggers in every age group, but I'd like to think the older one gets the more one looks for companionship.
Middle aged men? Bwahahaha! Most are looking for a pretty young thing with fake boobs and not too much in the brain department. I have to laugh when those dudes get burned big time.
01-24-2021, 01:45 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Position: 73N A
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by jaxsurf
Some of the divorce discussions over the years (here and elsewhere), always get me thinking about marriage, and why high-earning men even get married (to low earners). It just doesn't make sense to me from a risk analysis point of view. I'm generally in support of marriage, and would one day like to get married, because I do think it's good for people, for communities, and for society. But if you're a multi-millionaire or a billionaire, why would you even bother? Having that amount of money would significantly change the equation for me. It's not that I wouldn't ever be able to trust someone that they have the best of intentions and are truly in love going into a marriage, it's that the deck is so incredibly stacked against the high earner in the event of divorce that it would seem to definitely favor not getting married.
It's not even that I dislike alimony or child support, I think they are both fine concepts and they need to exist, it's just that it seems like more often than not they're applied incredibly unfairly. A couple could treat each other with fairness and respect and equality for their entire marriage, but if they end up divorcing for any reason, it's incredibly likely that the divorce settlement won't be fair and equitable. The system seems almost designed to ensure that outcome. Break ups can be incredibly emotional events, and when you combine an event like that with a high income man, the kind of support network that women have (and older men typically don't have), with money grubbing attorneys, and with our legal system, the result seems almost preordained. So why even bother?
And bringing it down to my level (since I am not a multi-millionaire or billionaire, and have zero prospect of becoming either), that still seems to be the outcome for men who only make a few hundred thousand per year. So if you're a decent, honest person who is reasonably attractive, with a high earning job (say, an airline pilot), the prospect of a military pension, and all the stability that those things imply, you're kind of in the drivers seat. So why risk losing half your pension (for life), half of your retirement money, probably your house, and a ton of money every month, for well past the time that any reasonable person would say is fair?
People constantly say, well if you're thinking about those things then you probably just don't love the other person enough, or you're not truly in love with them, but that flies in the face of all of the divorces that occur every year, between two people who were SO SURE that they were absolutely soulmates and totally in love and would never leave one another. So it always seems a little disingenuous to me when people bring up those kind of arguments, because it seems to imply that one should ignore all that and just enter into marriage in a sort of wilful ignorance of what is a very likely outcome in the event of a divorce.
Am I missing something? Again, I like the idea of marriage, and I do want to get married (in theory), I just find the possibility of an incredibly disproportionate and unfair divorce settlement to be extremely galling. I'd feel much better about the whole business of marriage if it were more fair. Thoughts?
I post this here because I'm specifically interested in the thoughts and opinions of those who have similar lives to my own.
It's not even that I dislike alimony or child support, I think they are both fine concepts and they need to exist, it's just that it seems like more often than not they're applied incredibly unfairly. A couple could treat each other with fairness and respect and equality for their entire marriage, but if they end up divorcing for any reason, it's incredibly likely that the divorce settlement won't be fair and equitable. The system seems almost designed to ensure that outcome. Break ups can be incredibly emotional events, and when you combine an event like that with a high income man, the kind of support network that women have (and older men typically don't have), with money grubbing attorneys, and with our legal system, the result seems almost preordained. So why even bother?
And bringing it down to my level (since I am not a multi-millionaire or billionaire, and have zero prospect of becoming either), that still seems to be the outcome for men who only make a few hundred thousand per year. So if you're a decent, honest person who is reasonably attractive, with a high earning job (say, an airline pilot), the prospect of a military pension, and all the stability that those things imply, you're kind of in the drivers seat. So why risk losing half your pension (for life), half of your retirement money, probably your house, and a ton of money every month, for well past the time that any reasonable person would say is fair?
People constantly say, well if you're thinking about those things then you probably just don't love the other person enough, or you're not truly in love with them, but that flies in the face of all of the divorces that occur every year, between two people who were SO SURE that they were absolutely soulmates and totally in love and would never leave one another. So it always seems a little disingenuous to me when people bring up those kind of arguments, because it seems to imply that one should ignore all that and just enter into marriage in a sort of wilful ignorance of what is a very likely outcome in the event of a divorce.
Am I missing something? Again, I like the idea of marriage, and I do want to get married (in theory), I just find the possibility of an incredibly disproportionate and unfair divorce settlement to be extremely galling. I'd feel much better about the whole business of marriage if it were more fair. Thoughts?
I post this here because I'm specifically interested in the thoughts and opinions of those who have similar lives to my own.
Ex-wife of 22 years left me and kids for someone she met in inpatient rehab (which is a racket BTW but that’s another story.) She was always employed - majority of our marriage. She had a career as a school teacher, what she went to college for. She did not help me get to where I am today. She chose to be a school teacher so she should be able to live on the income of a school teacher. I always hated hearing that she is “entitled to live to the standard at which she was living while married.”
Why??? What about me? She gets alimony until I retire or she remarries. She can choose to never remarry to keep the alimony. Can live with another man (which she is.) There is no common law marriage in Florida.
I have to pay the ex 39k per year until I am 65. She wanted 55k per year. I was able to mediate that down. She took half of an inheritance that I received from my grandfather because, in the state of FL regardless of who’s name the money is in it is still considered marital property. I have full custody of kids. I do not receive child support. She took more than half my retirement. I had to refinance house to buy her out. I lost half of all cash and other investments.
Family law always talks about equity. Everything should be split but no one ever talks about who put the majority into the equation to create wealth.
Maybe I could have mediated a better deal but I knew that if I went to court I would be entirely destroyed financially and lose everything- even my kids. The Judge who would have presided was a female who was known to support women. I was told numerous times that I “make too much money.”
So much for fairness and equality.
She can now live her life like a college girl, screwing around, and being supported by her “daddy.” Must be nice.
Alimony reform is a must, in FL, and nationwide. That’s not just for men.
I believe in a bridge-the-gap alimony but for no longer than 5 years.
What is happening today to many, and to me, is a violation of my 13th Amendment rights. Indentured servitude - working to pay another when I receive no benefit.
It is wholly evil and it is wrong.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Flying Ninja
Regional
199
08-08-2021 10:18 AM
