Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Political Issues

Political Issues This forum is for discussing the political aspects of divorce: reform to divorce laws, men's rights, women's rights, injustices in the divorce system, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 10-23-2017, 10:44 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
"Ms. Willis experienced financial and economic disadvantages in her relationship with Mr. Saunders, some of which were of her own making. Her standard of living was significantly reduced as a result of the relationship ending. At the time of separation, she was dependent on Mr. Saunders, and since that time she has been in obvious need. I find that Ms. Willis is entitled to spousal support on the basis of need."

This is the case in a nut shell IMO. Need-based - totally different than compensatory. Some people's level of "need" is different than others. "Need" doesn't mean living on the gutter. SS is not indefinite.
If the man lost his job, and couldn't find a job, and the women still had a job. Would you say that the men would be in need and entitled to child support? 1967 is over in 2 months and it will be 1970. Do you think women will continue to encounter difficulties in obtaining employment in 1970 ?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 10-23-2017, 11:04 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,922
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Are you talking about the two people in this case who were partners in law firm together? Difficulty finding work? LOL they obviously aren't family law lawyers.

Your attempts to once again make derogatory comments regarding my age are noted. People like you rarely win in court you know.... You can't keep a discussion civil and you blow up and come apart. You'd be a walk-over in court.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 10-25-2017, 10:05 AM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,318
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
This is the case in a nut shell IMO. Need-based - totally different than compensatory. Some people's level of "need" is different than others. "Need" doesn't mean living on the gutter. SS is not indefinite.
Compensatory SS makes sense.

Needs based SS does not make sense.

Often, the two get muddled together. Some worthless slug stays home, nanny watches the kids, husband invents a product that makes a fortune, and during the divorce the slug somehow helped husband make his fortune by watching the nanny watch the kids. Boom, compensatory SS.

In this case though, there was no muddling. The judge actually listed all the ways wife did not qualify for compensatory SS. That's what makes this case so jarring, it is one of the more unjust cases of SS I have seen in a while.

Sidepoint: How did the formatting suddenly explode to all crap?
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 10-25-2017, 11:39 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 197
piggybanktoex is on a distinguished road
Default

"Often, the two get muddled together. Some worthless slug stays home, nanny watches the kids, husband invents a product that makes a fortune, and during the divorce the slug somehow helped husband make his fortune by watching the nanny watch the kids. Boom, compensatory SS."

That is the very unfair aspect of SS. Nothing she did influenced my success, to which she benefited to a great degree. Nothing I did prevented her from a working life, especially when the kids went to school. But bang, $3.5 cost to me running over 20 years after the marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 01:57 AM
Hand of Justice
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Shadows
Posts: 3,143
Links17 is on a distinguished road
Default

Needs based SS = Privatized Welfare.

Why make the state pay when you can make Dads pay?

Look at child support too - $ for $ clawbacks vs. Welfare

In order of priority

The State
Children
Women
Men

Make the bottom pay first then go up.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is there a reason not to allow late filing? Dadx5 Divorce & Family Law 4 12-02-2016 09:55 AM
Reason for delaying legal bill assessment trinton Divorce & Family Law 4 10-23-2016 12:59 PM
Reason for a child to have counsel cate Divorce & Family Law 1 05-11-2010 01:24 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:49 AM.