mental_traveller Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I read about a divorced guy who was earning $120k gross a year. After tax, alimony, and child support, guess what his take-home pay was? I'll let you post your best guesses here, before I reveal the answer. Link to post Share on other sites
Island Girl Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Why is he getting divorced? It would have some bearing on that amount... And you do mean California and not just "the west" right? Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Between 30-40K if the income was from employment and not self-employment. If the latter, he should fire his accountant/tax adviser Link to post Share on other sites
Art_Critic Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 How many kids.. how long were they married.. why are they getting divorced.. what are HIS assets worth...how much does his ex make.. does she stay at home and raise those kids... If the guy has 1 million in assets sitting in his name, investments.. 401k etc etc.. and he doesn't want to give up the marital portion then he will pay more for that... To many reasons why he doesn't have a big take home amount.. also.. who has custody of those children now.. I'll bet the amount is low.. but isn't it in almost all divorce cases ?.. I mean they are trying to raise children together after all and he does have to level the playing field with alimony... Wouldn't it really suck for him and his children if he was able to keep all his gross pay and not pay child support or alimony ? Link to post Share on other sites
BUENG1 Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Why is he getting divorced? It would have some bearing on that amount... And you do mean California and not just "the west" right? I think he means western world, US, Canada, Europe etc. Link to post Share on other sites
Darkrunner Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 Well he can probably afford a small efficiency apartment, if he's lucky, if the cow isn't getting 98% percent of his income. Child support should be based on the reasonable cost of raising children. Nowadays its just the court asking men how much they're making so they know how much they can take. Keep your stuff in your pants, men. Because sooner or later, you're gonna be screwed over. Link to post Share on other sites
BUENG1 Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 I read about a divorced guy who was earning $120k gross a year. After tax, alimony, and child support, guess what his take-home pay was? I'll let you post your best guesses here, before I reveal the answer. Don't leave us hanging whats the number?! I'd say 2-3 thousand Link to post Share on other sites
Eve Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 $55.000? No.. $50.000 Take care, Eve xx Link to post Share on other sites
bozwa Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 So you post a question like that and then never come back to post the answer? Anyhoo, here's my thing. Men in the west shouldn't be reluctant to get married, men should be reluctant to marry the WRONG person. There is most likely 400 red flags before a man marries the wrong woman (and vice versa), but they trudge on anyhow and get married. Only to get divorced a few years later after they've had three kids thinking THAT will definitely save their marriage - which it never does. Find your best friend, your other half, before you get married. Make sure there isn't even ONE red flag, make sure you're not compromising who you are or what you want for yourself out of life or changing everything to make the other person happy. Then get married, have your kids and don't worry about the alimony/child support sheeite. Link to post Share on other sites
Eve Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 Or, if you are really smart, make sure all your assets are not in your name! I know someone whose assests are exclusively in the name of his Dad .. just in case it all goes wrong. Others I know who have escaped with mimimum damage went self employed pretty bloody quickly in order to escape the evils of what is 'The Child Support Agency'. Take care, Eve xx Link to post Share on other sites
Shygirl15 Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 Men in the west shouldn't be reluctant to get married, men should be reluctant to marry the WRONG person. I agree. Also, men all over the world are reluctant to marry these days, not only in the west. It's a generational thing maybe. Link to post Share on other sites
SoulSearch_CO Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Well, you didn't mention if there was an arrearage owing on the CS. So the maximum allowable in that case (if he's not providing more than half support for current/new dependents - i.e., kids living with him now) is 60%. Taxes are around 30%...aren't they? So I'm going to say $12,000. LOL Extreme case, but if that's so, he needed a better attorney. Link to post Share on other sites
subdued Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 I think this reason for not getting married is nonsense. If it wasn't nonsense, then men wouldn't even be having sex with the women who they refuse to marry. I mean, why do men have sex with women to begin with when all women have to do is get pregnant and not have an abortion to get child support? I know there are condoms, but women have been known to get pregnant with condoms and men have been known to not want to use them. Whether or not the couple is married isn't going to stop judges from requiring the men to pay money for supporting their kids. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Getting for men these days is like playing russian roulette or betting everything you own in vegas. If you win it is great but most men lose and it costs them dearly. Link to post Share on other sites
Author mental_traveller Posted July 13, 2009 Author Share Posted July 13, 2009 Sorry I was a bit slow replying to this. Firstly, I meant just in Western civilisation i.e. Europe, N America etc. Anyway, the guy is US citizen in his 50s, he was married for 2 decades and had 2 kids, had been divorced a while. His take-home pay per month after tax, child support, and alimony was about $2750, out of a gross salary of $120k. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 No offense OP but these anti-marriage threads always floor me. It's like LS is a different world than where I live. In looking back at the last two years worth of men I got involved with, there were less than 30% who were in the least bit afraid of marriage, 20% who were upfront about being permanent bachelors, as well as never being married before. 50% of them were divorced. These were men in their mid to late thirties to early forties so I don't understand why the same demographics on LS, are so very different. Link to post Share on other sites
Author mental_traveller Posted July 13, 2009 Author Share Posted July 13, 2009 So you post a question like that and then never come back to post the answer? Anyhoo, here's my thing. Men in the west shouldn't be reluctant to get married, men should be reluctant to marry the WRONG person. There is most likely 400 red flags before a man marries the wrong woman (and vice versa), but they trudge on anyhow and get married. Only to get divorced a few years later after they've had three kids thinking THAT will definitely save their marriage - which it never does. Find your best friend, your other half, before you get married. Make sure there isn't even ONE red flag, make sure you're not compromising who you are or what you want for yourself out of life or changing everything to make the other person happy. Then get married, have your kids and don't worry about the alimony/child support sheeite. First off - just because someone doesn't reply in 3 days or a week, doesn't mean they "never" plan to reply. "Never" is a bit longer than a few days, after all. Not everyone reads this board every day or two, some of us have lives to live offline and post here occasionally. If that is too much for your patience to handle, feel free to PM me telling me how much $$$ you are willing to pay in order to persuade me to give a guaranteed 3 day turnaround on post replies. If it's competitive with what I make each hour at work, I'll consider it Second, this guy was married over 20 years. Are you sure there were obvious red flags ringing when he tied the knot? People change and being a great match at 25 is no guarantee you will feel the same at 45 or 50. Your advice to "don't worry about the alimony/child support" is exactly why divorced men (and women on higher incomes than their ex-husbands) are getting financially raped on a regular basis. Imagine earning $120k after a lifetime working your way up the career ladder, and taking home $2750 a month. I don't know about you, but if that was me, I'd feel gutted. What if the poor sap loses his job and ends up working for $30k? His alimony alone will be higher than his salary, the guy will be eating tinned tuna and drinking tap water for the rest of his life. If you think the risk of become nothing more than a human income-producing asset in the eyes of your ex-wife and the courts is worth taking, then be my guest. If you are lucky enough to have a lifelong marriage, then more power to you. But if your wife cheats, or puts on 100 lbs and starts dressing like a slob, or stops having sex with you - well, you are in a situation which isn't pleasant and which rhymes with plucked. Link to post Share on other sites
Author mental_traveller Posted July 13, 2009 Author Share Posted July 13, 2009 No offense OP but these anti-marriage threads always floor me. It's like LS is a different world than where I live. In looking back at the last two years worth of men I got involved with, there were less than 30% who were in the least bit afraid of marriage, 20% who were upfront about being permanent bachelors, as well as never being married before. 50% of them were divorced. These were men in their mid to late thirties to early forties so I don't understand why the same demographics on LS, are so very different. But your situation is rather different, since you aren't going to have any kids, and are unlikely to get involved with a guy earning 1/3 or less then your own income (or a guy with no income at all). The probability of you getting financially devastated by future divorce is therefore pretty remote. Consider however a 30 year old man on $60k and expected to be earning 2 times that by 40, who is considering marrying and starting a family. If in 10 years the marriage goes south, he faces the prospect of his take-home pay going from around $7k monthly (after tax) to $2750. How many people can afford a 60% pay cut? On top of that, he will probably get kicked out of his own home and lose custody of his kids, due to the tendency of courts to award both of those to the mother. What about joe sixpack on 30k? He's even more screwed. This isn't an anti-marriage post. It's an anti-insanity post. Current alimony and child support laws are so punitive that they are putting MANY normal men off the idea of marriage. It's bad enough looking at 35-50% divorce rates - a ruined marriage is enough suffering as it is. But the prospect of paying out 75% of gross income for up to 18 years is even worse. Thus, many otherwise normal, sane, rational men will simply refuse to contemplate the idea of tying the knot with any woman. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 No offense OP but these anti-marriage threads always floor me. It's like LS is a different world than where I live. In looking back at the last two years worth of men I got involved with, there were less than 30% who were in the least bit afraid of marriage, 20% who were upfront about being permanent bachelors, as well as never being married before. 50% of them were divorced. These were men in their mid to late thirties to early forties so I don't understand why the same demographics on LS, are so very different. Most men who marry have no idea what they are getting into. They think they will building a life with the woman they love and they be a happy family. What they don't know is that in time their angel will grow to despise and resent them and if she doesn't leave him she will certainly not love him anymore. If more men knew that eventually they will be sharing a bed with a woman that hates their guts they would not marry. Link to post Share on other sites
sb129 Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 What about the kids mother? Maybe she quit work to have and bring up said kids.... shouldn't she be compensated for that if thats the case? Anyway, I read an interesting article on the EXACT opposite of this topic today in a current affairs magazine. It was saying how some men in my country are not getting screwed as much as they were because of how commonplace it is now to form a family trust etc to protect their assets (usually not from divorce, but from creditors, as protection for kids, tax reasons etc etc). The article was warning couples to be aware of that- and that assets tied up in trust can't be split under the matrimonial properties act. My H and I don't own our house- we set up a family trust to buy it and own it- it protects it in the (unlikely but possible) event I am sued, and it protects it for our children if we do split up. We are both earning, and brought equal amounts to the marriage. A third party has to OK any decisions pertaining to the sale of our house and division of any trust assets. Link to post Share on other sites
sb129 Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 And PS- I agree with TBF, my world is totally different from the one on this particular thread. Here where I live, if you co-habit for 2 years or more, you have nearly as much legal rights to assets and property as you do if you are married (esp if you have kids) and people are still co-habiting and getting married, I don't know anyone who is "scared of marriage" because they are scared their assets might fly out the window if it doesn't work out. Link to post Share on other sites
stillafool Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Sorry I was a bit slow replying to this. Firstly, I meant just in Western civilisation i.e. Europe, N America etc. Anyway, the guy is US citizen in his 50s, he was married for 2 decades and had 2 kids, had been divorced a while. His take-home pay per month after tax, child support, and alimony was about $2750, out of a gross salary of $120k. No wonder these men don't divorce. It truly is "cheaper to keep her". Link to post Share on other sites
lkjh Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 as a man in the west I can tell you that this is one of the MANY reasons we don't want to get married. Another reason is women no longer make men marry them. There was a time when you really had to put effort in just to get a kiss. Now if you want to get her in bed all you have to do is invite her out for coffee. But the main reason is the fact that in this part of the world marriage is no longer valued. A man has no control over anything in his life. Marriage is no longer about the family, children, or future. It's just about what the woman wants and "needs". If she wants to divorce you, she can have everything and you get nothing. She can make you change careers, friends, and location, but if the guy ask for anything he is considered overbearing. If she cheats we have to understand what emotional needs we weren't filling. Then after the guy does all of that she can divorce him for no reason at all. It's sad but women in the west no longer look at marriage as a life long commitment, They look at it as a fairy tale Disney film and the second it gets ruff they jump ship. Link to post Share on other sites
lkjh Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Radical feminism is destroying marriage in the West. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts