Are men safer when living in common law?

[arabian]

Well Quebec has always wanted to be unique.

I found it interesting that the article mentions that Quebec has the largest population of Common Law couples in the world. It would stand to reason that someone living CL in Quebec should know, when they enter the CL relationship, that they have no rights to SS.

In my opinion Quebec is basically a Province with deep socialist views: Why pay for the ex when the government will look after them (welfare)?

[Concerned]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janibel
Concerned seems more concerned with his pocket book than with his kids ..... I'm also in Quebec - judges may award SS even...

sorry but I have never been married and have no children...
just doing some homework!

One interesting point from the Spousal Support decision in the Quebec case with regards to common law, is that it was most WOMEN judges that voted against the award of SS

In all due respect, Seriously 34k/month don't you people
see an alimony payment (SS) masked in the child support
payment here! rediculous ! Since when does it take
408k/year to support 3 kids. Not to mention plus the
salary she can earn by going to work.

thanks

[FWB]

In all due respect, Seriously 34k/month don't you people
see an alimony payment (SS) masked in the child support
payment here!

Errrrm...NO, and I'll tell you why. There is currently a thread on here of someone paying over 5k/month in CS because they are earning close to 300k/yr.

Now if you know how much Mr Cirque du soleil (Guy Laliberte) is worth, and how much he has been raking in a year for the past 7yrs, then you might be able to see why that amount might be just right.

Don't forget he is the same guy that paid all that money (35 million dollars) to go to Space, where he took loads of pictures, and came out with different version of his pictures from space book called Gaia

Special edition of the book by the way cost $875 US

[Concerned]

Errrrm...NO, and I'll tell you why. There is currently a thread on here of someone paying over 5k/month in CS because they are earning close to 300k/yr.

Now if you know how much Mr Cirque du soleil (Guy Laliberte) is worth, and how much he has been raking in a year for the past 7yrs, then you might be able to see why that amount might be just right.

Don't forget he is the same guy that paid all that money (35 million dollars) to go to Space, where he took loads of pictures, and came out with different version of his pictures from space book called Gaia

Special edition of the book by the way cost $875 US

Eeeeeeerrr disagree, who worked his ass off to make that
kind of money... Her???? She jumped aboard with a man
that was much more brilliant than many other men.... and
therefore it's his monetary talent that got him to make that
kind of money and a talent should not be used in
providing over exaggerated child support/alimony payments.

Even though he had three children with her, earning potential
should not be used to measure a child support payment like that.

You do realize she just won a lottery for having three kids with
a man.... and what about all the other women that had kids in this
world.... aren't they worth 34/k month ... I guess not since
probably Lola made children of gold or what!!! ridiculous!

I'm sorry the law should put a cap on this and I don't care
how much of a sex bomb she is or was.

Regards

[involveddad75]

Well Quebec has always wanted to be unique.

I found it interesting that the article mentions that Quebec has the largest population of Common Law couples in the world. It would stand to reason that someone living CL in Quebec should know, when they enter the CL relationship, that they have no rights to SS.

In my opinion Quebec is basically a Province with deep socialist views: Why pay for the ex when the government will look after them (welfare)?

I think that is one point of view.

Another is that Quebec could be viewed as more progressive, and that each individual is responsible for their own.

Why is there a presumption everywhere else in the country that if two people date for a long period of time that one party owns the other party?

What makes sleeping together or sharing a bed so different than room mates?

I know many people who live together, and don't share finances, they are living for the moment in a relationship, if they wanted to legalize it they would get married. Why does the government insist on stepping into our lives and dictate how things should be. In my opinion the government should get out of the bedrooms of it's citizens.

In the Quebec case it took so long because you had large feminist organizations join the case as interested parties. Funding one side.

[FWB]

OK.....we are both obviously looking at this from different perspectives (rightfully so), but I like facts when am doing my analysis

who worked his ass off to make that kind of money... Her????

Yes Mr Laliberte aka Eric did!

She jumped aboard with a man that was much more brilliant than many other men.

Errm...If this was indeed the case, as you so eloquently put it "Mr Laliberte is more brilliant than most men", why did he allow this to happen...surely he wasn't being held against his own will????

and therefore it's his monetary talent that got him to make that
kind of money

Not disputing that one iota....it's the same "monetary talent" that made Richard Branson, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Melinda Gates, Anne Roddick (Body Shop founder) all richer people. Then there is not so rich me earning my peanuts from my "university achieved talent"

a talent should not be used in providing over exaggerated child support/alimony payments.

I don't believe it was the talent that is used to provide "exaggerated" CS and SS payments. It's the proceeds from the "talent" or lack thereof that is used to calculate how much CS and SS

Even though he had three children with her, earning potential
should not be used to measure a child support payment like that.

Tell us what should then???

and what about all the other women that had kids in this world.... aren't they worth 34/k month

Unfortunately for some, the person they decide to have the numerous kids with, isn't as rich as Mr Laliberte. I mean you can ask yourself the questions...don't you deserve to win the lotto 649 jackpot also?

I'm sorry the law should put a cap on this and I don't care
how much of a sex bomb she is or was

This is the thing..."beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder", and "one person's meat is another person's poison". Do I think she is cute? Not really, but that is just me. In relation to your "sex bomb" comment, I remember a quote from Jason Statham in the movie 'Killer Elite 2011'....

In order not to be bias here, am going to make it gender free...."show me a beautiful person, and I'll show you a person that is tired of sleeping with them"

So the takeaway in all this? Perhaps:

1. keep it in your pants
2. To be hood winked by infatuation
3. get yourself nipped
4. find someone of an equal footing as you
5. Try to spot a gold digger

Why does the government insist on stepping into our lives and dictate how things should be. In my opinion the government should get out of the bedrooms of it's citizens.

Errrm....if you are not prepared to get burned, don't get into bed with the devil! You asked a very interesting question, but you do realize that this is the same Govt you ask to provide education, health, social activities for yourself and products of your relationship (kids)

Am sure there are loads of women that will agree with you 100%, but when the you know what hits the fan in relationships....these same people are the ones that run to the Govt asking for help....so it does become the Govt's business

[Concerned]

"Errm...If this was indeed the case, as you so eloquently put it "Mr Laliberte is more brilliant than most men", why did he allow this to happen...surely he wasn't being held against his own will????"

Why do most men (brilliant or not) allow this to happen... well it's because divorce is not something that can be controlled individualistically. When there's another person in the mix and he or she wants to divorce there is no turning back no matter how brilliant you are because the other person drags you into the turmoil of divorce weather you like it or not and then it's typically the law that takes over with horrific laws that are unfair to men. In other words these things have nothing to do with an individuals intelligence but only have to do with stupidity and the greed of the one that wants to get divorced for monetary benefits.

"Not disputing that one iota....it's the same "monetary talent" that made Richard Branson, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Melinda Gates, Anne Roddick (Body Shop founder) all richer people. Then there is not so rich me earning my peanuts from my "university achieved talent"

I don't see your point. These people had a personal and unique way of doing things which were probably criticized until they started making money. This magic that put these people over the top... should not be up for grabs by lawyers or judges. These earning potentials are sacred and should solely belong to them. If a women wants to divorce, I don't disagree in helping out but with moderate payments and not based on what their husbands worked all their life for.

"I don't believe it was the talent that is used to provide"exaggerated" CS and SS payments. It's the proceeds from the "talent" or lack thereof that is used to calculate how much CS and SS"

Yes exactly, the proceeds from the talent .... so guess what ... no talent = no proceeds.

Tell us what should then???

How about a modest amount of monthly payment to help the women with her bills and raising the kids. A 5k to 8k cap would of been more that enough. Now I'm not sure who initiated the divorce, but a free 60k plus a year along with her going to work for a part time salary would be acceptable. And don't tell me it's not enough because people with lots less and on welfare are able to support a family of three. So why wouldn't she. Your a women, and you want 34k or 74k or 104k a month, then get of you bummer and start a business and try yourself to have that sort of success.

"Unfortunately for some, the person they decide to have the numerous kids with, isn't as rich as Mr Laliberte. I mean you can ask yourself the questions...don't you deserve to win the lotto 649 jackpot also?"

Yes but not from the fruits of someone else... sorry... a lottery is a lottery and I would of won it fair and square.
:-)

"In order not to be bias here, am going to make it gender free...."show me a beautiful person, and I'll show you a person that is tired of sleeping with them

So the takeaway in all this? Perhaps:

1. keep it in your pants
2. To be hood winked by infatuation
3. get yourself nipped
4. find someone of an equal footing as you
5. Try to spot a gold digger"

Good then, you would indeed be in agreement with me that your short list should be part of a divorce law 101 course given to all secondary 5 high school male students so they would be ready and aware of the whole entrapment issues that millions of men have suffered from the unexpected implications during divorce.

"Errrm....if you are not prepared to get burned, don't get into bed with the devil! You asked a very interesting question, but you do realize that this is the same Govt you ask to provide education, health, social activities for yourself and products of your relationship (kids)

Am sure there are loads of women that will agree with you 100%, but when the you know what hits the fan in relationships....these same people are the ones that run to the Govt asking for help....so it does become the Govt's business"

I think governments are afraid to change the way they do things. I have heard about Florida abolishing alimony ... they are going about things on the right foot....

Like I say I have no problem in helping out.... where I have
a problem is fact that the payments should not be pulled
according to a man's salary... they should be pulled in
accordance to the living expenses required by the candidate that gets custody of the kids.

I even have no problem throwing in there a weekly service
for a nanny ! But this 34k/month stuff... has got to go!!!

cheers