Page 1 of 3 123>
Topic Options
#40112 - 07/10/10 10:21 AM That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ...
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2599
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Is California a great state or what?

Reminds me of a "Dear Abby" column arguing about the inconsideration of spousal suicide because of its emotional effect on the other. One woman agreed, saying it would deprive her of the opportunity to dispatch him herself.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#40115 - 07/10/10 11:44 AM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Oxus Offline
member


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 513
Dr. Aquino,

The link is not working


Ir Shti Shta-tu
Oxus

Top
#40118 - 07/10/10 02:29 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Oxus]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2599
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
The link tests OK for me, but here's the news item:

 Quote:
Schwarzenegger approves spouse protection bill

The Associated Press
Posted: 07/09/2010 06:05:11 PM PDT
Updated: 07/09/2010 06:05:11 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed a bill to protect men and women from vengeful spouses.

The governor on Friday signed AB2674 by Assemblyman Marty Block, a Democrat from San Diego.

It says that spouses who solicit the murder of their husband or wife are not entitled to collect benefits in divorce proceedings.

The bill was inspired by the true-life story of a Pomona police detective, John Pomroy. His ex-wife collected about $70,000 from the couple's estate after she was convicted of soliciting a hit man to murder him in 2003.

Until now, California's no-fault divorce code was silent on such efforts. A couple's shared assets are usually split evenly during a divorce.

The bill takes effect in January.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#40120 - 07/10/10 06:48 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Oxus]
zippadydooda Offline
pledge


Registered: 08/09/09
Posts: 61
Loc: San Diego, California
For once, I like the governators choice. At least he's done one thing right, lol. Since I can't vote yet, I can only hope that the next governor of California does a better job.

Edited by zippadydooda (07/10/10 06:51 PM)
Edit Reason: clarification and 1 liner
_________________________
Blathering nonsense.

Top
#40121 - 07/10/10 06:56 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: zippadydooda]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1147
Loc: Amarillo, TX
I think the whole idea of alimony, in any case, is pretty outdated in this day and age. It used to be that a man's wife was his dependent, that women were exclusively homemakers or old maids, and that if a man left his wife she was without any means whatsoever of supporting herself.

Now that women can get jobs, they shouldn't feel entitled to maintain the standard of living they did in marriage when the marriage ends. Tough cookie. Get a job.

Presumably, if a couple gets divorced, both partners should be able to move on with their lives and start new relationships if they so choose. Saddling an ex with alimony for the rest of his/her life is basically saying, "If I can't have you, I'll at least keep your money so no one else can!" In the 21st century, alimony is as obsolete as button-up boots.

Note that I'm not talking about child support. That's a whole other kettle of fish. Children are still legitimately dependents and those who choose to have them need to take responsibility for them. But alimony? Send that the way of the dodo.


Edited by XiaoGui17 (07/10/10 06:58 PM)
Edit Reason: punctuation typo
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#40812 - 07/25/10 07:14 AM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: XiaoGui17]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I think the whole idea of alimony, in any case, is pretty outdated in this day and age. It used to be that a man's wife was his dependent, that women were exclusively homemakers or old maids, and that if a man left his wife she was without any means whatsoever of supporting herself.

Now that women can get jobs, they shouldn't feel entitled to maintain the standard of living they did in marriage when the marriage ends. Tough cookie. Get a job.

Presumably, if a couple gets divorced, both partners should be able to move on with their lives and start new relationships if they so choose. Saddling an ex with alimony for the rest of his/her life is basically saying, "If I can't have you, I'll at least keep your money so no one else can!" In the 21st century, alimony is as obsolete as button-up boots.

Note that I'm not talking about child support. That's a whole other kettle of fish. Children are still legitimately dependents and those who choose to have them need to take responsibility for them. But alimony? Send that the way of the dodo.


You don't know any body that has recently been through a divorce, do you? I do. Just this past fall as a matter of fact.

She has been out of the work force for over 11 years raising her children, because that's what he wanted her to do and what the children needed from her. Over 2 years ago, he packed his shit one day while she was out running errands and as she pulled in, he was leaving with the boys and a butt load of stuff (clothes, what have you). She asked where he was going and he announced he and their boys were going to his new apartment "so the boys can check it out". She has struggled financially since and has tried to get a job for the past 2 years. The job field dynamics have changed considerably, and not everyone can just "get a job", anymore. Without the measly $300 in alimony that their divorce gave her (for a horribly long 3 years after 12 years of marriage to this piece of shit), she'd not be able to pay for things like her electric and food. Yes, she gets child support but that's definitely not enough. I hate to say it, but alimony in her case, has helped keep the electric on and fed them. I know it doesn't always work that way, but it definitely shouldn't be completely disposed of either when it comes to divorces. He helped create that family unit with her, he should help support ALL of it while she either goes back to school so she CAN get a job, or until she can find a job on her own. Doesn't matter, either way.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
#40814 - 07/25/10 08:14 AM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Nyte]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I disagree.

First, anyone who thinks marriage is by definition a life-long event should be flogged in public.

So, all decisions made during a marriage should be done realizing that when a marriage ends, certain decisions could bite you in the ass. I'm all for parents taking responsibility for their offspring, even if it is solely financial, but alimony for ex-partners should be removed from the system.
If a former ex-partner decides to support out of free will, it is his choice but none should be forced by the system because their former partner didn't have long-term consequences in mind when taking certain decisions during the marriage.

Responsibility to the responsible.

D.

Top
#40815 - 07/25/10 08:34 AM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Diavolo]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I disagree.

First, anyone who thinks marriage is by definition a life-long event should be flogged in public.

So, all decisions made during a marriage should be done realizing that when a marriage ends, certain decisions could bite you in the ass. I'm all for parents taking responsibility for their offspring, even if it is solely financial, but alimony for ex-partners should be removed from the system.
If a former ex-partner decides to support out of free will, it is his choice but none should be forced by the system because their former partner didn't have long-term consequences in mind when taking certain decisions during the marriage.

Responsibility to the responsible.

D.


I understand what you're saying. In turn, at the time they got married, she honestly believed it was for the rest of her life. I'm not excusing her actions of not furthering herself. In the same respect, I will not excuse what he did either, knowing she honestly believed they were in it for the LONG haul. She didn't marry him at 18 and drop 2 kids right away. She married in her late 20's. They made the decision together that she would stay home with their children. She's still learning the hard way, that not everything is forever and now knows she has to do for herself and her children. She's forwarding herself through huge strides and it's not like she's getting alimony from this man for the rest of either of their lives. Just long enough for her to get herself on her feet and should she find a stable, financially feesible job, she loses her alimony before those 3 years are up. He DID agree to this in their divorce settlement but if it was done away with, she wouldn't stand a fighting chance of actually getting on her feet with 2 young children in her home. I could see not getting it if she was all by herself but she's not, and raising children without the honest help of this man, other than his child support definitely makes things take a different path.

Let me make myself clear about this man. He likes playing part-time father and when she did have a job for a few weeks, he wouldn't watch the kids so she could work. Everyone else she knows works, so it's not like she can just drop them off with someone else when he decides he's not taking the boys because it's inconvenient for him. Babysitting is out of the question, because that takes money she doesn't have and her boys aren't old enough to be home alone. Day care is out as well, simply because of the cost. If this man was really a decent father, it would be different, but in some cases alimony does have it's purposes.

His child support is a minimum for these 2 children. Our state figures his earnings and then figures hers as if she has a job, even though when he left without warning, she didn't. It's been a rough road, but she's growing and learning every day that she has to depend on herself more and more. Right now though, his alimony has a genuine purpose of taking care of his children. I know that's not always the case, but sometimes it is, and I'd rather he give her alimony then her end up on welfare, which is where she possibly could end up without it. So let him pay for a few years for leaving like he did and for being an SOB about helping with his boys while she gets on her feet, is my feelings.

I've been down the road of "financial support ONLY" with my oldest son's father and let me tell you, I was fortunate enough to have help from family and friends that COULD watch my oldest while I worked, otherwise, I don't know if things would have been different, even now.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
#40843 - 07/25/10 08:10 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Nyte]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1147
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Nyte

You don't know any body that has recently been through a divorce, do you? I do. Just this past fall as a matter of fact.


I do, in fact, which is part of why I feel so strongly about this. There are two sides to every story, and for every woman like that friend of yours who legitimately happens to have it rough because some POS left her high and dry, there's a gold-digger exploiting an honest, hard-working man who was just trying to do the right thing.

I've seen a lot, and I do mean a lot, of exploitative women. They don't work, they don't do housework, and they don't take care of any children they may have. They sit around watching Judge Judy and shoveling Cheetos into their mouths, letting themselves go because they "hooked" a man. Many hooked men in the first place by lying and claiming to be on birth control whilst deliberately trying to get pregnant to force the man into "honorably" marrying her "for the child." When the man finally wakes up and realizes how badly he's getting fucked up the ass in this arrangement, even if he leaves this cunt he's still stuck paying her alimony to pig out and watch TV.

The economy hit us all pretty bad, and we're all having trouble finding jobs. Yes, sometimes a divorced woman can't get a job after years being a homemaker. But what if a divorced man loses his job and can't afford alimony? I've seen this happen to honest men and it royally sucks for them as well. They can be imprisoned for contempt. Technically they shouldn't be if they're genuinely unable to pay, but the system is broken. Alimony is financial help to one party, but it's also a financial burden to another. And we could just as easily use the crummy economy as cause for abolishing such a financial burden.

If anything, your friend's situation is a sign of how badly the child support system in your state needs to be reformed, not a sign that alimony needs to be perpetuated. It seems to me she should be receiving WAY, way more in child support, since she was, after all, the children's primary caretaker. Part of the reason she's unemployable now is because of her dedication to her children. Instead of receiving a bit more in alimony in addition to child support, she should be receiving way more in child support.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#40848 - 07/25/10 09:45 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: XiaoGui17]
ta2zz Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1552
Loc: Connecticut

The real problem is women so willing to pop out babies thinking this will secure or fix their relationship. Responsibility for the responsible also means that when you choose to pop out a brat with someone this is your choice. You have chosen to forever change your existence with or without your spouse.

Child services suck because all the babies’ mommas are stressing the system. Those with children often feel they should be privileged because of their choice. Fuck that!

Welfare, alimony, child support lets just call these things what they are, handouts. People who are not secure should not have children its simple really.

Oh by the way the original article seems to have little to do with your speech on alimony and more to do with shared assets. It also strictly mentions that this bill affects only those who kill or plot to kill their spouse.

“It says that spouses who solicit the murder of their husband or wife are not entitled to collect benefits in divorce proceedings.”

Did you two have anything to say on topic? I mean do you agree or disagree with the ruling by Arnold?

~T~
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy

Top
#40860 - 07/26/10 06:12 AM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: ta2zz]
felixgarnet Offline
active member


Registered: 10/17/09
Posts: 688
Loc: UK
"The real problem is women so willing to pop out babies thinking this will secure or fix their relationship. Responsibility for the responsible also means that when you choose to pop out a brat with someone this is your choice. You have chosen to forever change your existence with or without your spouse." (ta2zz)

Oh? They pop them out all by themselves? I've said this to any number of men - married, cohabiting, playing the field - and I'll say it again. You have just as much responsibility to prevent parenthood as does the woman, if this is what you want. Use condoms every time (even if your lover is "on the Pill"), do something other than intercourse or be man enough to get a vasectomy. Otherwise, shut your whining when you find out you're about to become a father. It should be a privilege, not an accident.
_________________________
"Here's to Artifice!" - Anton Szandor LaVey.

Top
#40869 - 07/26/10 05:45 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: ta2zz]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1147
Loc: Amarillo, TX
Word, ta2zz.

 Originally Posted By: ta2zz

Oh by the way the original article seems to have little to do with your speech on alimony and more to do with shared assets. It also strictly mentions that this bill affects only those who kill or plot to kill their spouse.

“It says that spouses who solicit the murder of their husband or wife are not entitled to collect benefits in divorce proceedings.”

Did you two have anything to say on topic? I mean do you agree or disagree with the ruling by Arnold?

~T~


As for Arnold's ruling, I guess my sentiment was, "Too little, too late." Making rulings about the minute details of the circumstances under which alimony should be dispensed is, to me, like trying to iron out the details of alcohol prohibition penalties or making adjustments to a single-payer healthcare program. When I have such a revulsion to the general thing in principle, tiny victories earn a shrug. I guess the thread did get a little off topic with my rant.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#40873 - 07/26/10 07:50 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: felixgarnet]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: felixgarnet
"The real problem is women so willing to pop out babies thinking this will secure or fix their relationship. Responsibility for the responsible also means that when you choose to pop out a brat with someone this is your choice. You have chosen to forever change your existence with or without your spouse." (ta2zz)

Oh? They pop them out all by themselves? I've said this to any number of men - married, cohabiting, playing the field - and I'll say it again. You have just as much responsibility to prevent parenthood as does the woman, if this is what you want. Use condoms every time (even if your lover is "on the Pill"), do something other than intercourse or be man enough to get a vasectomy. Otherwise, shut your whining when you find out you're about to become a father. It should be a privilege, not an accident.


This is the biggest bullshit canard argument of all time.

Basically you are saying if you drive a car, knowing an accident is possible, you deserve to die in an accident. That accidents happen does not obligate you to ride them out to their conclusion without taking any steps to right them or prevent them.

Just as women(and men) are responsible for what they do with their own bodies when it is convenient for them (happy sex time), so too is it theirs when it isn't. Responsibility for what a woman does with her body does not magically transfer to someone else just because she chooses to stay pregnant. What you are spewing is politically correct bubblegum 'wisdom' based on tired and outdated notions of equality for all responsibility for some, which is completely backwards.

This isn't to say I agree with deadbeat dads, but having sex is not an obligation to parenthood.

Also, who are you to say what 'should be' a privilege for others?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#40874 - 07/26/10 08:02 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: Dan_Dread]
felixgarnet Offline
active member


Registered: 10/17/09
Posts: 688
Loc: UK
Eh? I said quite clearly that if a man does not wish to create a child it is as much his responsibility to use contraception as it is the woman's. If you don't wish to become a father, take the necessary steps to avoid becoming one. Have I misunderstood something about "responsibility to the responsible"?
As for creating and raising a child, I believe it should be recognised as a privilege ( maybe a gift is a better word? ), not just as something you do because there's nothing on TV or you'd like some extra state benefits. You're creating human life not baking a cake.
_________________________
"Here's to Artifice!" - Anton Szandor LaVey.

Top
#40875 - 07/26/10 08:29 PM Re: That shouldn't let the bastard off alimony ... [Re: felixgarnet]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Right so say steps are taken to prevent pregnancy, but it still happens, and the woman chooses to carry it to term against the wishes of the man.

Where does the responsibility lie?

As for what you think should be recognized as a privilege, that begins and ends with you. You do not get to dictate that to others. Frankly, most people are worth less than a good cake.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
Page 1 of 3 123>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.022 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.