Posted on 07/03/2023 11:45:28 AM PDT by proust
“if”-not “it”...
Excellent! This limits alimony in common sense ways. No longer can someone get alimony forever and for any reason. Of course, this passed once it was found many women were the bread winners.
A lady I knew was incensed when she learned she would have to pay alimony to her ex-husband. She made significantly more than he did.
An Optimist is one looking forward to marriage.
A pessimist is a married optimist.
You mean just like unemployment checks, which also end after so many months?
Had she never been married..and had a kid(s) ..i guess she would have gone on welfare for the rest of her life?
A fresh new crop of Entitled-Karen-Freakouts coming up on YouTube.
Shortages of box wine and cat collars too.
I really think this should be left up to the judge.
One extreme a woman marries at 18 like I did, avoids college and career building to focus on husband’s education, home keeping and career, and gets dumped or cheated on or serious abused at 45 you know what, lifetime alimony.
Other extreme a well educated career gal marries at 30 loses no income gets bored at 35 and leaves the man - no alimony.
It is not just to take a woman’s prime educational, childbearing, and career building years and then dump her. She should get life time alimony of a reasonable amount if she was gutted. There is no emotional, career, or financial rebuild at the point to be made.
Sir, it is near impossible to get a well paying job at age 45 with no degree and no career behind me. Each marriage must be looked at as unique.
To reinvent myself at that age, go back to college, and start a career is very difficult although it can usually be done. But then you are STARTING a late life career - lower pay and not very hireable.
There is a type of man who abandons an older wife for a new model after she has given him all the best years of her life faithfully. We have all seen it.
10 years maximum alimony & 1/2 of assets acquired during the marriage in CA. As of 3 (?) years ago alimony is tax free. It’s hard to get both alimony and child support, but some do. Most don’t get it for all 10 years. Marriages that end in divorce last for a median of 8 years.
Or..it could be like my ex wife, who basically abandoned our family for her career, played the victim when I divorced her and tells both of our two grown sons that she won’t marry her live in boyfriend of almost a decade, because she’d lose half of my pension that she’s “entitled to”.
> Or..it could be like my ex wife… <
Oh, yes. There are great injustices on each side of the fence. That’s something I should have made clear in my last post.
Reagan approved of no-fault divorce in California and it spread across the nation.
It was another dagger in the family unit.
Seems reasonable approach in CA on something at least! It’s tax free for the recipient and not tax deductible for the payer (at least federal level, not sure about state). Before it was taxable for the recipient and tax deductible (this scenario was usually better for both parties) and awards were adjusted for that. Given the alimony payer is nearly always paying 1.5x-10x higher effective tax rate, could have split the difference before and ended up with more $ to receiver and more to giver than now. Oh well.
Rare circumstance but becoming a bit more common. Would love for it to become very common - you might get real alimony reform in more places.
After 8 years of medical school, there won’t be a house, or assets to divide up, yet. Just a bunch of bills.
Even in your example - which is an extreme one [and proving that abuse would be tough] - paying alimony after early retirement age of 62 would be nuts (or 17 years in this example, I still don’t see more than half the # of years you are married as worst case scenario of reasonable, which is 13.5). You’ll get half the assets at divorce, plus a good chunk of his income in his most likely normal years, plus can work to make money yourself now. Lifetime alimony is nuts, especially if there were significant assets to split, and you’ll already be eligible for half his SS.
I agree thats morally wrong, but half the assets and a large 10 year payment, plus you get half his SS, is still a pretty good deal, especially compared to what the average wife would get in a similar situation would be minimal and she did the same support (and increasingly, the male doing the support of higher powered exec female)
Sure, if you spent 90-100% of the income. That kind of income, even after paying student loans, could easily generate $100-200k a year in investments, compounding at 9% annual (average S&P). In a scenario where there are no assets, I agree longer alimony would make sense. In my scenario, she’d get about $1.5 million, and I’d have to pay ~$150k/yr TAX FREE for however many years she’d be awarded (likely 8-9 years) if she left me today [we’re in a happy marriage today so unlikely, but we did separate 4 years ago and nearly divorced, so I had done a lot of research on it in my state.]
Oh, my. Don't forget guys - it's PERMANENT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.