Thoughts on Alimony

[Stuxnet]

Let's assume a married couple with no children. When they got married, both individuals made $30,000/year. Five years later, Party A makes $70,000/year and Party B makes $35,000/year. Neither individual has sacrificed themselves for the other. No one decided to be a stay-at-home wife/husband. No one went back to school at the expense of people individuals, etc. Party A was simply more ambitious.

So one of them decides they want a divorce. Does Party B deserve alimony? I'm not talking in terms of the law. The question is in the spirit of "if you were making the law yourself, what would you do in this scenario.

My hangup on Party A paying Party B alimony is that Party A is essentially penalized for being more successful than Party B. It would be one thing if B helped pay for additional schooling for A, and that schooling resulted in additional pay. Or perhaps B decided to be a homemaker. In those cases, B made personal sacrifices that held back B's career for the betterment of A's career.

 

[dullard]

You really can't separate the law from a legal issue such as alimony. However, I will try to separate them. The main goal of alimony is to allow both parties to get back on their feet after a divorce. If one party is incapable of supporting him or herself, then alimony allows time for that person to get a job/education/other form of support.

In your example, both sides can support themselves, so no alimony should be paid. In many states, this will be true that no alimony will be paid.

Often, alimony isn't the problem. It is usually small and temporary. It is child support and equalization payments that screw one party big time.

For me, I got divorced when I just went from a poor student to a decent engineer income. My state (a no-fault state so I can't use the argument that the divorce was cause by her cheating on me) said alimony should be small and temporary. She really didn't deserve any alimony and probably a court battle wouldn't have given her alimony. However, the amount of alimony she requested was less than the cost to me to pay a lawyer to battle her. So I caved and gave it to her. I lose, but I chose the lesser of two losing choices.

 

[leftyman]

wheres the party?

 

[johnjbruin]

Welcome to "Life is a bitch"

 

[IGBT]

..yet another example that nothing is free.

 

[FoBoT]

no

 

[BoomerD]

Alimony = "The fvcking you get, for the fvcking you got"...

 

[Wapp]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Alimony = "The fvcking you get, for the fvcking you got"...

:heart:

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
It would be one thing if B helped pay for additional schooling for A, and that schooling resulted in additional pay. Or perhaps B decided to be a homemaker. In those cases, B made personal sacrifices that held back B's career for the betterment of A's career.

Does B not benefit from A in return for B's sacrifice?

 

[JS80]

This is why you should marry until you're 35, with a prenup.

 

[episodic]

No person should be responsible for another adult after divorce.

 

[psydancerqt]

i'll get alimony if my husband wants a divorce

 

[yowolabi]

I think the original pupose of alimony was so that "stay at home" wives weren't put in a position where they had to either stay married or be put on the street with no money and very few skills with which to earn any. This caused a lot of people to stay in truly horrible conditions at home. I think that's an honorable goal and don't really have a problem with it.

However, i think there should definitely be only a limited time to pay alimony. Basically, just enough time for a determined person to learn a skill and become self sufficient. The length of the marriage should come into play also. If you've been married for 40 years, then you should resign yourself to paying alimony for the rest of your life. Consideration has to be given to how much the marriage impaired a person's ability to earn for themselves. If both parties continued to work and are both self-sufficient, then no alimony.

All this "lifestyle I was accustomed to" garbage should be terminated. Someone once said that if the man is used to regular sex and having dinner cooked for him, then theoretically he should get to keep that too. When you break up you lose the good things that that the other person gave you, that's what breaking up is.

 

[ZOOYUKA]

Great Weird Al song.

 

[MisterJackson]

Originally posted by: psydancerqt
i'll get alimony if my husband wants a divorce

:roll:

 

[ryan256]

Well... personally I believe that no alimony should be paid. Both parties can support themselves.
But here is what will happen.
1) If party A is a man he will be paying party B $20,000 a year alimony.
2) If party A is a woman she will not get alimony from party B, but will get his car & house.

 

[Stuxnet]

You hit it square on the head, in my opinion, yowolabi. Let's break it down:

Originally posted by: yowolabi
I think the original pupose of alimony was so that "stay at home" wives weren't put in a position where they had to either stay married or be put on the street with no money and very few skills with which to earn any. This caused a lot of people to stay in truly horrible conditions at home. I think that's an honorable goal and don't really have a problem with it.

I couldn't agree more. In such a case, the women has made personal sacrifices so she could care for the home and family. Had she not been married, she would have been forced to acquire skills so she could become self-sufficient. Hence, she deserves alimony in my opinion.

Originally posted by: yowolabi
However, i think there should definitely be only a limited time to pay alimony. Basically, just enough time for a determined person to learn a skill and become self sufficient.

Exactly. If a person is even entitled to it in the first place (under our new laws ), then it should be limited. They should be given the opportunity/means to earn a 2-year degree. This would give them the skills necessary to enter the workforce making enough money to support themselves and acquire the means necessary to continue their education if they so desire. But the key word you mentioned is DETERMINED. If they piss around for 5 years getting this Associate's Degree, they're up sh*t creek.

Originally posted by: yowolabi
Consideration has to be given to how much the marriage impaired a person's ability to earn for themselves. If both parties continued to work and are both self-sufficient, then no alimony.

This, too, is key. To me, this translates to what sacrifices did you make for the marriage that made bettering your career too difficult to manage?. In other words, are you financially screwed because you abandoned your career for the sake of family goals, or because you're lazy and/or unambitious? This makes a big difference in my opinion.

If you simply became accustomed to watching your spouse break their back climbing the ladder to six figures, while you sat all comfy and content in your $30,000/year job, then I have no compassion.

Originally posted by: yowolabi
All this "lifestyle I was accustomed to" garbage should be terminated. Someone once said that if the man is used to regular sex and having dinner cooked for him, then theoretically he should get to keep that too. When you break up you lose the good things that that the other person gave you, that's what breaking up is.

I believe that "someone" was Chris Rock, and I think he made a damn good point. Why is this ridiculous line of thinking limited to material things? Perhaps my spouse was accustomed to a 3,000 square foot home and a Mercedes, but I was accustomed to fellatio three times a week. I can live on no fellatio if I can't find a replacement, and my ex-spouse can live in a studio apartment if she can't find one either.

 

[psydancerqt]

i agree... if an adult can support themselves, they shouldn't get anything from a divorce (with no kids)

 

[akubi]

:music:
if you aint no punk holla We Want Prenup
WE WANT PRENUPT!, Yeaah
It's something that you need to have
Cause when she leave yo ass she gone leave with half
18 years, 18 years
:music:

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: akubi
:music:
if you aint no punk holla We Want Prenup
WE WANT PRENUPT!, Yeaah
It's something that you need to have
Cause when she leave yo ass she gone leave with half
18 years, 18 years
:music:

What song is that?

 

[akubi]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: akubi
:music:
if you aint no punk holla We Want Prenup
WE WANT PRENUPT!, Yeaah
It's something that you need to have
Cause when she leave yo ass she gone leave with half
18 years, 18 years
:music:

What song is that?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-t67Q5OUISk

 

[Leejai]

Alimony is just another expample of old processes which should be eliminated today imo.

 

[episodic]

I hate the housewife argument. Noone forced her to do that. She could have left at any time.

 

[Shortcut]

Chris Rock had a great segment re: alimony

" When it's time to get a divorce, women got it made. You go to court, start talkin' that ******. "I'm used to this, I'm used to that. I'm accustomed to this." What the fvck is accustomed? What's that got to do with ******? You go to a restaurant, you accustomed to eatin'. You leave, you ain't eatin' no more. They don't owe you a steak. What about what the man's used to? It might not be money, but during the course of a relationship, a man grows accustomed to a few things. I would love to see a man go to court and say, "Your honor, check this out. I'm accustomed to fvckin' her four times a week. Now I feel I should be able to fvck her at least twice a week. I mean, she can have the alimony, but I want some pussy payments.""

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I couldn't agree more. In such a case, the women has made personal sacrifices so she could care for the home and family. Had she not been married, she would have been forced to acquire skills so she could become self-sufficient. Hence, she deserves alimony in my opinion.

That is the reason alimony exists.

Exactly. If a person is even entitled to it in the first place (under our new laws ), then it should be limited. They should be given the opportunity/means to earn a 2-year degree. This would give them the skills necessary to enter the workforce making enough money to support themselves and acquire the means necessary to continue their education if they so desire. But the key word you mentioned is DETERMINED. If they piss around for 5 years getting this Associate's Degree, they're up sh*t creek.

Alimony often is limited to a couple of years under our current laws. I think you are confusing alimony with child support and/or equalization.

I believe that "someone" was Chris Rock, and I think he made a damn good point. Why is this ridiculous line of thinking limited to material things? Perhaps my spouse was accustomed to a 3,000 square foot home and a Mercedes, but I was accustomed to fellatio three times a week. I can live on no fellatio if I can't find a replacement, and my ex-spouse can live in a studio apartment if she can't find one either.

Again, alimony has nothing to do with who gets what house or Mercedes. You are confusing alimony with equalization.

Alimony = monthly payments due to a spouse unable to support himself/herself shortly after a divorce.

Equalization = wife gets everything you have to make things equal.