SS - ouch!

Status
Not open for further replies.
hadenough said:
Billm: Did *you* know everything you know now 30 years ago? The way you tell it, she had this diabolical money grab planned all along. Bullshit.

Yes, okay - in a perfect world we all make our choices and we are all responsible for them. People change over time. Circumstances change. Everything can change. For some of your comments, you have the compassion of a boa constrictor.
...
Click to expand...

Compassion? She lived the life of a millionaire for over 30 years, she received over 10 million in lump sum spousal, she probably has even more in retirement and who knows what else.

She made an agreement years ago. If she was not a liar then, she became one the day she no longer agreed with it, yet said/did nothing about it.

I prefer to strive for a perfect world. Changes are part of that. I'm sure there was no part of the agreement that said 'unless I change my mind'. I'm assuming she was at least a normally intelligent adult. I would prefer to live in a world where adults can be held to their agreements, that's all. The threat of loosing access to father in law's money not withstanding :)
 
By Billm "Compassion? She lived the life of a millionaire for over 30 years, she received over 10 million in lump sum spousal, she probably has even more in retirement and who knows what else"

I made the compassion comment in reference (as I said) to some of your other comments. I'm pretty sure Christine McCain doesn't require your's (or anyone's) compassion. ;)
 
caranna said:
to Billm: I'm quite sure if Christine McCain refused to sign the agreement, her husband would have tried and forced her to do so; after all, he did not want to be disowned. I think the judge made a wise decision, and if you don't agree, tough, although you have every right to disagree.
Click to expand...

I am sure the husband wanted her to sign it, I'm sure she wanted to sign it. I'm sure she wished the father in law/husband never came up with the idea. But sign it she did, and I assume she is a reasonably intelligent and competent woman (don't you?), and she should live up to the agreement that SHE made.

caranna said:
As for people who have been abused, they have every right to state what they went through. We all have choices but that does not mean we do not make mistakes along the way. These mistakes can help us to grow.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The mistakes I make help me grow. Growth also means not blaming others for your mistakes.

"I can't believe I let them tell me what to do" vs "They controlled me, I had no choice"

Big difference between these two attitudes. Which statement do you think shows someone who has grown?
 
"Growing" is indeed a good thing. A move forward. Personally, I blame myself for being foolish - funny thing is, my ex "blames" me for everything. Hopefully some day he will take a good long self inventory of himself and see where he needs to assign blameworthy conduct, to himself. Suffice it to say, I won't be holding my breath for that.

We all make mistakes, the problem is that a lot of people can't/won't admit (to) the mistakes or outright awful things they have done.

We can 'grow' as individuals and still have some compassion. *in my opinion*

There's a hell of a lot to be said for contrition.
 
Last edited:
Janus: We all get that you don't believe in SS. I find your posts to be HIGHLY offensive to those of us who, indeed, are recipients of court-ordered SS.

This forum is for all people affected by divorce to post on, certainly not just for people who are paying SS.

I hope you can chill out and when you participate in a discussion you can show some respect for the other people on this forum.

To lay blame against someone without knowing all, if any, of the facts involved in a decision that has been determined by a judge is simply ill-informed, ignorant.
 
hadenough: From what little has been published about the McCain's divorce I will say that simple math tells me that (10 million vs. 175k/month ) Mrs. McCain was probably wise in executing her right to go to trial.

I find it interesting that the case even went to trial. Maybe we can hope for a book to be written about this some day. Some people would prefer to settle out of court and others just want to air the dirty laundry. We can only wonder...
 
caranna said:
This is the kind of lifestyle you want your daughter to live? And you are willing to groom her for it? That is abhorrent.
Click to expand...

That is the world that is being created by recipients of support. Logical consequences of a twisted system.

Given that roughly half of all marriages end in divorce, success is best obtained by marrying above your social/economic standing.

Every time a woman is told that she should receive spoils for marrying (and subsequently divorcing) a rich man, a girl learns that working is a sucker's game for those who can't marry rich. It is up to us to decide which kind of message we wish to send. Are women helpless children who need to be financial leeches their entire life, or are they independent adults who can sign their own contracts and make their own decisions?

I prefer to think of women as capable, independent adults. The courts (and support recipients) clearly beg to differ. I guess we have to agree to disagree.
 
arabian said:
Janus: We all get that you don't believe in SS. I find your posts to be HIGHLY offensive to those of us who, indeed, are recipients of court-ordered SS.
Click to expand...

In my experience, words hurt the most when they have a ring of unpleasant truth to them.

I hope you can chill out and when you participate in a discussion you can show some respect for the other people on this forum.
Click to expand...

I'm in a bad mood today, so I think perhaps you are correct, I'll stay away from the forum tonight :)
 
I find it somewhat amusing that there is notably no reference in this poster's remarks regarding the women who end up divorced with significantly less than what they went into their marriages with.

Janus, it seems to me that if I accept your being in a bad mood as an excuse for your previous posts, you should perhaps get some anger-management therapy coupled with anti-depressant medication (I'm sure your clinician can best advise you). Misogynistic opinions are not only socially unacceptable they are unhealthy particularly when raising young children. If your kids start spewing this nonsense they will be singled out by their peers and ridiculed.
 
Yep, The society is getting a good "lesson" of what you can get away with. Even signing a legally binding contract has little merit in court! It is SICK!

My issue is if I imagine myself being a "wealthy" parent, I have a right to protect MY finances! It is my right to decide to give it to MY kids and not their money hungry spouses wanna be. There is no duress by having a Parent-in-law ask a spouse-wanna-be to sign a contract that states in other words " I am not getting married for money". It might be unpleasant, but it is their choice to sign or tell it to go to hell.
 
I think the lesson to be learned here is that prenuptial agreements aren't worth the paper they are written on. They are amended and overturned frequently. Any agreement is.

Marriage is a legally-binding agreement. That agreement is breached daily. That is why we have family court.
 
arabian said:
I think the lesson to be learned here is that prenuptial agreements aren't worth the paper they are written on. They are amended and overturned frequently. Any agreement is.

Marriage is a legally-binding agreement. That agreement is breached daily. That is why we have family court.
Click to expand...

And that is why I think that the whole "entitlement" issue is empowered by courts, so people are pouring in and courts are overflowing with this issue. In Canada it is a no fault divorce, but it feels like one ALWAYS gets penalized for divorcing while the other is rewarded.

It should be simple enough, and even those that "sacrificed" their career while the other advanced their's, fair enough, would receive 50% of jointly acquired assets (while only one contributed financially).

This whole thing of maintaining the same lifestyle is weird in itself. Why divorce then if you will continue being "financially married"? One can sleep on the couch with the same outcome.
 
JB514 said:
Y

My issue is if I imagine myself being a "wealthy" parent, I have a right to protect MY finances! It is my right to decide to give it to MY kids and not their money hungry spouses wanna be. There is no duress by having a Parent-in-law ask a spouse-wanna-be to sign a contract that states in other words " I am not getting married for money". It might be unpleasant, but it is their choice to sign or tell it to go to hell.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you realize that in the McCain case, it was halfway into the marriage, (15 years), before the papers were issued by the elder McCain. But that is probably a moot point.

I've often thought that it would be great to have a marriage course including giving a taste to the star-struck lovers of what could and will happen should the marriage end up on the rocks. I don't see that occurring any time soon.
 
First - lets makes some corrections. This agreement was NOT a pre-nup. It wasn't contemplated at the time of marriage, thus the wife really couldn't say no or even the husband say "well, if you won't sign, I won't marry you".

The agreement was a POST-nuptual agreement signed 15 years into the marriage. Not signing it would have had huge consequences to both the husband and wife as the Patriarch of the family would've cut both of them off. So I can see definitely see a level of duress, if not from the husband here who doesn't want to be disowned, to definitely the husbands father.

That said, I don't agree with the huge amount being required. Just because someone gets accustomed to something, doesn't mean that it should remain that way forever, notwithstanding material changes in circumstances. Things change, life changes. The wife should be entitled to some compensatory ss, but one would think that a multi-million $$ home, 2 (like million $$+) cottages and $7million would be plenty to establish one self and life quite comfortably for the rest of ones life.
 
Thank you for pointing out the facts HD and Caranna. (I had no idea re: this detail). 15 years into a 30 year marriage, I'd say there was duress involved.

I am mildly amused by how rabid some of the men on this forum are. Even the ones that don't pay SS or have filed for bankruptcy and absolved themselves of most of their debts. Very interesting to see who jumps on the band wagon.

2m/per year is probably a drop in the bucket for Mr. McCain to pay in SS. Professional Athletes that get divorced pay some pretty big alimony - how come nobody comments on that?
 
Last edited:
By Caranna: "I''ve often thought that it would be great to have a marriage course including giving a taste to the star-struck lovers of what could and will happen should the marriage end up on the rocks. I don't see that occurring any time soon."

Yeah I'm sure a booth at the Bridal/Wedding shows that take place every year would not have a spot for a vendor trying to sell this course! What a dream-spoiler that could be.
 
"My issue is if I imagine myself being a "wealthy" parent, I have a right to protect MY finances! It is my right to decide to give it to MY kids and not their money hungry spouses wanna be. There is no duress by having a Parent-in-law ask a spouse-wanna-be to sign a contract that states in other words "

Okay jB, let's "imagine" that you're wealthy and you're going to update your will as to how your millions will be distributed upon your demise. You have 3 kids for the sake of this exercise. Off they go, and get married. It's a beautiful sunny day. Soon, there are grandchildren. And then one day, you pop your clogs. Your kids inherit your 'fortune' and guess what? So do their spouses. Sure, you can always try to foresee the event that they may divorce, but chances are the men/women your kids married will get a piece of that pie.

There is no way to have total control over any of this. There are many loopholes and ways around "agreements." I had a co-hab agreement once upon a time. Would you like to take a guess where that got me? It got me nowhere. I don't even know where it is, and it doesn't matter b/c it was and is worthless.

Too bad, so sad. Lesson learned.
 
hadenough said:
.

I am mildly amused by how rabid some of the men on this forum are. Even the ones that don't pay SS or have filed for bankruptcy and absolved themselves of most of their debts. Very interesting to see who jumps on the band wagon.
Click to expand...

I've also been a bit surprised myself at how some usually sensible and levelheaded males on this forum will allow their buttons to be pushed (and thereby perhaps showing their true colours to emerge) on certain financial matters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top