Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19804
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
After 27 years of marriage, of which I'm sure most were spent supporting her husband and children, end up living below poverty while the husband goes off to live very nicely.
---> You're "sure"...how? Do you know these people personally? Have you been lurkng/peeping on their marriage for the last 27 years?
---> And what "poverty"? At the very least, she's getting HALF of a MILLION in assets...or did you forget that? Additionally, it is NOT uncommon to negotiate a LOWER alimony amount in return for a larger share of the marital assets. You're also talking about Utah...lower COL.
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19804
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
1200 is not a lot--if you adjust each year for inflation, that would be fairer. also make it permanent
---> I think that 27 years is pretty "permanent" given her age. Average life expectancy for a woman is 79.5 if there are no health issues, is a non-smoker and has never given birth.
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
|
|
She also assumes that the payor of alimony is getting a 3% COL raise every year. Why would it be fair to pay a COL raise to the ex wife if the ex husband/payor is not getting 3% raise himself? What if the economy deflates, should her alimony go down then?
--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!
|
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3151
|
|
I am with you on this one. I do not think SS should ever be awarded. Especially in a marriage that was this long. The wife had ample time to better herself and work. She did not want to.
I do not understand why anyone would have to pay anyone, because a marriage does not work out.
|
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
|
|
Thank-you...I was begining to feel that I was the only female out there who felt that way. :)
|
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3151
|
|
Nope, you are not the only one. I can not and will not ever understand the concept that someone has to pay someone else because they were married and it did not work out.
I think women have come way to far too ever be in the position that they have to have someone else pay them when they divorce.
It just blows my mind that a man or woman would take money from someone, just because they were married.
|
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19804
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
I do not think SS should ever be awarded.
---> Why not?
The wife had ample time to better herself and work.
---> Why does she HAVE to?
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
brauny1
recently joined
Reged: 05/02/07
Posts: 3
Loc: Utah
|
|
Folks, thanks for all the opinions! I would be more sympathetic if it wasn't for the fact she expected support throughout the marriage. She was very self absorbed and I basically raised the kids. Long story of course, but she is fully capable of earning her own living and is receiving half ($500K) of everything I earned. She was more expensive than the kids.
|
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3151
|
|
I just don't see that it is right for someone to pay someone else just because they were married. I beleive that people should work for money they receive. Not just because they were married. She may have worked taking care of the hubby for years, but that was when they were married.
--->Why does she HAVE to?
She doesn't. Because she will get alimoney.
|
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19804
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
She doesn't. Because she will get alimoney.
---> That doesn't answer the question.
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
