If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CTV News)   Think your alimony sucks? Try $175,000 PER MONTH   (ctvnews.ca) divider line 47
    More: Fail, spousal support, dental insurance, McCain Foods, child support  
•       •       •

17344 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jan 2013 at 11:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-01-13 11:53:47 PM
5 votes:
The fact that she asked for child support for children of ages 19-26 makes my level of sympathy for her absolute zero.
2013-01-13 11:46:27 PM
5 votes:

doglover: You want to get divorced, you should get a reasonable amount of assets based on your contribution to joint possessions and your own property. That's it.


It is very common for one partner in a marriage to sacrifice their career so that the other partner is successful in theirs. It could be working instead of going to grad school so the partner can go to medical school. It could be giving up a dream job because it would mean moving. It could be raising the children full time so that the partner can pursue a demanding career without having to worry about child raising.

In all those examples the successful spouse owes a part of their continued success on the other partner's contribution. So, in the divorce the less successful partner is entitled to a part of the rewards of what they worked together towards.

/I know, I'm not going to make bitter divorcees less bitter.
2013-01-13 08:43:45 PM
5 votes:
I've never understood the court's decision to side with the "style that you've grown accustomed" argument.

So? She/He spent that way according to the knowledge of the joint bank account. Once that ends, they should get an equitable split (Which, in this case sounds like she was given $7,000,000 and a few houses.) and then each is responsible for doing their own budget based upon their own assets.

I don't honestly care, but it always smacked me as really f*cked up for the courts to rule like they do. Some of the people they rule against are rich scumbags who we'd all like to see take a hit. Yeah, that's fine. I laugh, you laugh. It just doesn't seem legally right to do.

I'd spend as much as possible if I was allowed and had a wife worth $500,000,000... That doesn't mean I'm legally allowed to do so after we break up. Dunno... YMMV
2013-01-13 11:08:39 PM
4 votes:
<I>In her ruling, Ontario Superior Court Justice Susan Greer said that while the agreement may have seemed fair to Michael McCain when it was signed in 1997, over time it had become "unconscionable."</i>

Wow, big surprise that a female judge would set aside contract law over something as subjective as conscience.
And even after deciding it's legal, why does alimony have to be based on her previous level of living? She agreed to leave the marriage didn't she?
2013-01-14 01:22:44 AM
3 votes:

Giltric: 19-26 is the new newborn-18

Wow...just..wow.


Yeah, well, if people don't like it, they can pay young people enough to live on, not require degrees for fields that blatantly don't need them, and don't make people run up a ton of debt for college if they do need it. It's not that today's 20-somethings don't want to be independent, but the deck is stacked against them in like a dozen different ways.
2013-01-13 11:45:01 PM
3 votes:
Would've been cheaper just to kill her.
2013-01-13 11:20:11 PM
3 votes:

Gig103: Wow, big surprise that a female judge would set aside contract law


Signing a contract under duress (the elder McCain threatened to disown his children if their spouses did not sign away their rights to spousal support and some business assets in exchange for a cash payout and some properties including the matrimonial home.) makes the contract invalid.
2013-01-13 10:58:02 PM
3 votes:
Out of curiosity. If one party goes belly up, are they still obligated to pay full alimony, despite having a drastic lifestyle change themselves? Because right now it sounds like alimony is a winning lottery ticket for farking the right piece of meat and nothing else.
mjg
2013-01-14 04:11:11 AM
2 votes:
i.ytimg.com

That kid was always trouble.
2013-01-14 12:40:41 AM
2 votes:

Flakeloaf: sandbar67: He's worth half a billion dollars ... so in other words, it takes him about the same amount of time to earn $175K in interest as it does to write out a check for $175K and walk it out to the mailbox. Boo hoo.

It's not about what he's lost, it's about what she's unjustly gained. Marrying somebody who's in line to get a fortune doesn't entitle you to squat. Hell, being descended from someone who's made a fortune doesn't necessarily mean any of it's going to become yours. If he's divorcing her, I'm guessing he plans to stick it to her by withholding as much of his family's money as he can because again, fark her, it's not like she earned it. You don't ask for a doggy bag at the all-you-can-eat buffet.


As the spouse for the majority of this adult life shouldn't she really be getting half of the estate.  I think he's the one making out here.
2013-01-14 12:16:35 AM
2 votes:

SevenizGud: The solution is: don't get married. Don't knock any biatches up. If you are uber-loaded, then get fixed. Make sure nobody ever uses your address for any billing. Never have any joint accounts. Never hold yourself out as spouses. Leave a massive paper trail that demonstrates the relationship is not monogamous, that you have no intent for it to be permanent, and that you are not co-habitating.


Some people, regardless of how much money they have, like having interpersonal relationships. Relationships require trust.

This thread is going to have a lot of people who forget that.
2013-01-13 11:58:54 PM
2 votes:
McCain family fortune was made by the family patriarch. Please explain how the wife of one of the sons contributed to the making of this fortune such that she should be entitled to such a HUGE monthly alimony payment?

Oh...female judge. Nevermind.
2013-01-13 11:58:05 PM
2 votes:

AxemRed: Lesson: If you're rich, don't get married.


Lesson: If you're rich If you're a man, don't get married.

/ftfy
2013-01-13 11:39:25 PM
2 votes:
Lesson: If you're rich, don't get married.
2013-01-13 11:29:06 PM
2 votes:

NewportBarGuy: I've never understood the court's decision to side with the "style that you've grown accustomed" argument.


This.

You want someone's money? Don't get divorced.

You want to get divorced, you should get a reasonable amount of assets based on your contribution to joint possessions and your own property. That's it.
2013-01-13 10:37:18 PM
2 votes:

ArkAngel: Pribar: Hell if I could afford to pay 175k a month I would be a happy man

/did the math, if I sold my house, shop, tools and emptied my bank accounts I could support her for almost 8 months.
//assuming I could get market value for everything.

I don't believe you. What's your bank account number?


Marry me and find out
2013-01-13 09:09:39 PM
2 votes:
The price of freedom can be enormous.
2013-01-14 07:37:58 PM
1 votes:

Flakeloaf: 5monkeys: Flakeloaf: Argh, doubleposting

5monkeys: He pushed me to quit after 8 months because he couldn't handle doing any of "my job" (watching the kids or laundry, ect.).

But at the same time, wow. What a dillhole. Sounds like you got outta there about six kids too late.

/wasn't there
//easy to say now

The court said the same thing as your Boobies. That support was there to help the family he was leaving become self sufficient, not to maintain a lifestyle.

This post is correct too. He was/is a dillhole who I stayed with way too long. I was 18 when we got married and too naive to see the red flags. I knew it was bad two kids in but tried my damndest to make it work. Then after years of his whoring around and alcohol abuse I drew a line in the sand. His exact words were " get a job, not only a job, a career. Make enough to take care of yourself and the kids. I don't want to be a husband or full time dad anymore. Maybe I can do this every other weekend." He didn't just mean weekend dad, he meant every other weekend with me too. I may have been stupid for staying married to him for all those years, but after that statement I was done. I lawyered up and filed for divorce. He truly believed he was going to move out, keep the girlfriend he had at that moment, and stay married to me while I worked and supported everything. Plus come a few times a month for sexytime with me. When I pointed out that I did not have the skills or education to do that he told me that it was not his problem.

Good on you for having the necessary parts to stand up and tell him to go fark his hat. A lot of women would've simply stood there and continued to take it because they couldn't stand wading through bad times to have good. I can't imagine what that's like.

/still not my business


Eh. To tell you the truth it hasn't been bad without him. It's way easier and we are all happier without him here. I don't get the bitter part of divorce. I went through a mild stage of it, then moved on. I wasn't happy with him, as most divorced couples aren't, but I am happy now. It ended because it should have. Why be bitter over that?
2013-01-14 02:11:32 PM
1 votes:

SpaceyCat: Gig103: Wow, big surprise that a female judge would set aside contract law

Signing a contract under duress (the elder McCain threatened to disown his children if their spouses did not sign away their rights to spousal support and some business assets in exchange for a cash payout and some properties including the matrimonial home.) makes the contract invalid.


That is duress just as much as signing away your life on any contract. Don't believe me? Don't pay your mortgage for a while and see what a judge says when your kicked out on your arse without any support.
2013-01-14 08:39:49 AM
1 votes:

ongbok: fluffy2097: Soupysales: So could I ask Bill Gates for $200,000 a year? He wouldn't even miss it.

It's not a question of whether he can afford it, it's a question of does she deserve it.

Have you been married to Bill Gates for 30 years? Were you forced to stay in that marriage because Bill forced you to sign an agreement that if you leave you'll be disowned and have nothing?

/you might have some standing then.
//No farking tears for a billionaire who can't manage his family life.

The agreement she signed said that if a divorce happened she would get 7 million dollars and the family home. You don't think that that is fair?


The agreement was signed 16 years into a 30 year marriage and served to benefit him, and only him. Had she refused to sign it, he would have significantly less wealth - huge benefit to him, but what did she get out of it? The joy of seeing her (now ex-) husband inherit a lot of money? That doesn't sound like a contract that would hold up in court.

I really don't see why she should get less than half of the assets acquired during the course of the marriage (take their net worth, including salary and retirement, subtract his net worth in 1981, divide by two, and subtract off her assets and salary/retirement). If she gets less, why shouldn't he be paying her? She was an equal party to the marriage - if he didn't like that, he shouldn't have married her to begin with.

Of course, regardless of what happened here, everyone involved is still filthy rich. There's just no sympathy available for either party.
2013-01-14 08:00:33 AM
1 votes:
but women are equal, and don't need someone to pay for them to live on their own right? And they are smart enough that they know exactly what they were doing when they signed the pre-nup, right? They are also powerful enough they dont need to bench-shop for a female judge to hear their case, right?
2013-01-14 07:10:51 AM
1 votes:

SecretAgentWoman: I married the wrong damn men.

I can't even get child support out of the losers, let alone alimony.

/not bitter
//ok, I'm bitter


Child support is overrated. My ex owes me about 20K, but it's worth not having to see her.
2013-01-14 05:53:16 AM
1 votes:
NewportBarGuy: "I've never understood the court's decision to side with the "style that you've grown accustomed" argument."

No kidding. Try losing your job and see if you can get unemployment insurance in the style I've grown accustomed to. Apparently, having a uterus and letting automatic biological processes take over for nine months deserves special treatment.
2013-01-14 04:29:32 AM
1 votes:
Now that gay marriage is becoming more common, I'm curious to see how the alimony laws will work for those divorces. One guy stays home with their adopted Asian baby, while the other goes to school to become a doctor. They get divorced 15 years later after the doctor has become an extremely successful plastic surgeon, with mansions, cars, a jet, the whole rich guy thing. Does the stay at home dad get $175,000 a month because he got used to it?
2013-01-14 04:19:52 AM
1 votes:
If it flies, floats, or farks, lease it.
2013-01-14 02:05:14 AM
1 votes:
How about just don't get married if you're wealthy. Renting is much less expensive.
2013-01-14 01:50:44 AM
1 votes:

NewportBarGuy: I've never understood the court's decision to side with the "style that you've grown accustomed" argument.

So? She/He spent that way according to the knowledge of the joint bank account. Once that ends, they should get an equitable split (Which, in this case sounds like she was given $7,000,000 and a few houses.) and then each is responsible for doing their own budget based upon their own assets.

I don't honestly care, but it always smacked me as really f*cked up for the courts to rule like they do. Some of the people they rule against are rich scumbags who we'd all like to see take a hit. Yeah, that's fine. I laugh, you laugh. It just doesn't seem legally right to do.

I'd spend as much as possible if I was allowed and had a wife worth $500,000,000... That doesn't mean I'm legally allowed to do so after we break up. Dunno... YMMV


I think it's this way because historically a woman's quality of life went significantly down after she's had a divorce. Back in the day (hell, even today in some backwards countries) a man can just drop a woman like a rock and make off with everything, leaving her single, raising the kids and with the stigma of not being good enough to keep a man.

I can understand why certain laws were written to prevent this, forcing the husband to take responsibility for the wife he agreed to be with until death, especially when she's made significant sacrifices in her own life and education for the family. (The woman ITFA gave 30+ years to this guy! It's not like she was a trophy wife gold digger)

I see it like Unions. It originally was to protect those who constantly got screwed over, and morphed into something else when people got too greedy and found out how to play the system.

/Not saying that this applies to the people ITFA, but I can see why the judged ruled in this case.
2013-01-14 01:45:38 AM
1 votes:
Where are the women's rights people? This subject never comes up. 'We want equal pay!' (and ps: treat us like special babies when we get divorced).

It's a double standard and it sucks.

Yes, I know not all women are like that. But I've seen some.
2013-01-14 01:13:44 AM
1 votes:

Flakeloaf: DarkLancelot: Flakeloaf: sandbar67: He's worth half a billion dollars ... so in other words, it takes him about the same amount of time to earn $175K in interest as it does to write out a check for $175K and walk it out to the mailbox. Boo hoo.

It's not about what he's lost, it's about what she's unjustly gained. Marrying somebody who's in line to get a fortune doesn't entitle you to squat. Hell, being descended from someone who's made a fortune doesn't necessarily mean any of it's going to become yours. If he's divorcing her, I'm guessing he plans to stick it to her by withholding as much of his family's money as he can because again, fark her, it's not like she earned it. You don't ask for a doggy bag at the all-you-can-eat buffet.

As the spouse for the majority of this adult life shouldn't she really be getting half of the estate.  I think he's the one making out here.

Why? Why does being his wife entitle her to anything his father did? It's a family gift, given to him with specific instructions not to share it with her to cut off exactly this kind of gold digging.

zepillin: He is. It's called a will.

But if the money were put into a trust, as opposed to simply passed on to any children whose spouses agreed to sign the contract, it wouldn't matter if she divorced him and took half of what he owned because the trust fund doesn't belong to him.


It ceases to be his father's once he inherits it.  What a plan for gold digging? Marrying and staying with him 30 years and having several children, a shrewd plan indeed.
2013-01-14 01:12:08 AM
1 votes:
i362.photobucket.com
2013-01-14 01:07:21 AM
1 votes:

poison_amy: The fact that she asked for child support for children of ages 19-26 makes my level of sympathy for her absolute zero.


While these kids are probably trust funded up to their eyeballs, in all sincerity it is very difficult for 19-26 year-olds to survive with no parental assistance at all in the modern world. Most career paths don't pull down enough to fully handle all of their own bills until you finish a 4-year degree and have a couple of years experience, and that's if everything goes well. For some highly professional careers, like doctors, lawyers, and scientists, it takes even longer than that. Of course there are sometimes undesirable options (like running up massive debt) but that's not really self-sufficiency either, and it can extend the second phase of dependency (where you are making money, but not enough to live on).
2013-01-14 01:02:05 AM
1 votes:
I'm willing to bet there are some high end professional hit men who will do the job for $250K and the body will never be found.
2013-01-14 12:56:24 AM
1 votes:

SpaceyCat: Gig103: Wow, big surprise that a female judge would set aside contract law

Signing a contract under duress (the elder McCain threatened to disown his children if their spouses did not sign away their rights to spousal support and some business assets in exchange for a cash payout and some properties including the matrimonial home.) makes the contract invalid.


That duress is between McCain and his father, not the wife. She loved him enough to sign it when he probably made it clear that the family fortune was most important. She knew what family she was marrying into and I'm sure relished at the thought of that lifestyle (I would).
2013-01-14 12:37:36 AM
1 votes:

sandbar67: He's worth half a billion dollars ... so in other words, it takes him about the same amount of time to earn $175K in interest as it does to write out a check for $175K and walk it out to the mailbox. Boo hoo.


It's not about what he's lost, it's about what she's unjustly gained. Marrying somebody who's in line to get a fortune doesn't entitle you to squat. Hell, being descended from someone who's made a fortune doesn't necessarily mean any of it's going to become yours. If he's divorcing her, I'm guessing he plans to stick it to her by withholding as much of his family's money as he can because again, fark her, it's not like she earned it. You don't ask for a doggy bag at the all-you-can-eat buffet.
2013-01-14 12:34:18 AM
1 votes:
shiat, I'm straight, but I'd gladly marry and divorce a CEO for $175,000 per month.
2013-01-14 12:31:19 AM
1 votes:
The decisions made by family courts are, for all intents and purposes, random. Knowing this, we can deduce two things:

1. If your lawyer allows a proceeding to last through the various stages of mediation and negotiation long enough to actually wind up being heard in front of a judge, you have hired a retard.

2. If you are a male in the situation described in #1, and your response upon learning that you are on your way to court does not involve the immediate settlement of your dispute or the death of one of the litigants, your lawyer is orders of magnitude smarter than you.
2013-01-14 12:11:56 AM
1 votes:
Q: You know why divorce is so expensive?

A: Because they are worth it.
2013-01-14 12:11:13 AM
1 votes:

basemetal: The price of freedom can be enormous.


This is what they mean by "freedom isn't free".
2013-01-14 12:08:44 AM
1 votes:

What_Would_Jimi_Do: any one wonder why us smart ones stay single.


RhetButlerorical question, My friend.
2013-01-14 12:08:12 AM
1 votes:
I wish I had the money to give $175,000 per month...

I wish I had the money to give $175,000 per decade.
2013-01-14 12:02:23 AM
1 votes:
This is what happens when east-coast oligarchs meet Ontario judges. You're in Upper Canada now biatches.
2013-01-14 12:01:52 AM
1 votes:

ongbok: And lets not forget that the agreement gave her 7 million and a house in the event of a divorce. It wasn't like she was being handed a change of clothes and a bus ticket.


fark the biatches and ho's.

any one wonder why us smart ones stay single.
2013-01-13 11:58:07 PM
1 votes:

AxemRed: Lesson: If you're rich, don't get married.


Or at the very least not without a prenup
2013-01-13 11:56:59 PM
1 votes:

Krieghund: /I know, I'm not going to make bitter divorcees less bitter.


Or stupid laws less stupid. Yes there exists a possibility that one spouse assists the other in making a good household.

Back in reality, protecting them is as important as protecting other people from gold diggers.
2013-01-13 11:55:28 PM
1 votes:

SpaceyCat: Gig103: Wow, big surprise that a female judge would set aside contract law

Signing a contract under duress (the elder McCain threatened to disown his children if their spouses did not sign away their rights to spousal support and some business assets in exchange for a cash payout and some properties including the matrimonial home.) makes the contract invalid.


What duress? She didn't have to marry him. She could have decided that she didn't want to be involved in a family that crazy.
2013-01-13 11:38:00 PM
1 votes:

SecretAgentWoman: I married the wrong damn men.

I can't even get child support out of the losers, let alone alimony.

/not bitter
//ok, I'm bitter


A double divorced woman is bitter? No way.
2013-01-13 09:30:44 PM
1 votes:

fusillade762: She noted he once clandestinely invited mental health professionals to a party so that they could observe his wife, whom he believes suffers from bipolar disorder.

This in turn forced Christine McCain to seek the services of a psychiatrist, who found no evidence to warrant a diagnosis, the judge wrote, adding the experience "must have been very hurtful."

Yo dawg, we heard you like psychiatrists so we brought a psychiatrist to the party so you'll get a psychiatrist.


She's not crazy her husband had her tested.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report