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.

(LA Times)   Billionare's ex-wife wants $320,000/month and private jet access as child support for one 3 year old.   (latimes.com) divider line 205
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6579 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jan 2002 at 10:06 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



205 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-01-14 10:08:36 AM
"Divorce - the Latin word meaning to rip out a man's genitals through his wallet."

-Robbie Williams-

(Of all people. Though it's actually Greek, I believe)
 
2002-01-14 10:08:45 AM
Hahahahaha. Stupid biatch.
 
2002-01-14 10:09:39 AM
From Chris Rock:
"What about what the MAN'S accustomed to? I'd like to see the guy in court. 'Aight, y'honor, check this out. I'm accustomed to fockin' her 5 nights a week. Now I think I should at LEAST get 3 times!
Nah! When you're in a restaurant, you're accustomed to eating! When you leave, they don't owe you a steak!"
 
fb-
2002-01-14 10:11:21 AM
And I want one of those breakfast sandwiches from Solitude. No such luck biatch.
 
2002-01-14 10:14:30 AM
WOW! I bet she gets it, too.
 
fj
2002-01-14 10:16:43 AM
It's not a 3 year old child, it's a lifelong meal ticket.
 
2002-01-14 10:17:40 AM
FJ-

Exactly.
 
2002-01-14 10:18:21 AM
Must be one heck of a toddler.
 
lbo
2002-01-14 10:20:44 AM
Didn't you guys read the article? The baby sh!ts diamonds.
 
2002-01-14 10:21:49 AM
Cheaper to have the opportunist whore killed; if money is really the issue here.
 
2002-01-14 10:23:19 AM
is no one else outraged by this common practice? ug it makes me sick.

what can the guy possibly do? he refuses to marry her, then she gets a lawyer so he marries her with a pre-nup. He only agrees to marry her for a month, and then she uses the divorce as a reason to steal 300 farking thousand dollars a MONTH.

nauseating. this woman should be forced to *gasp* get a farking job.

typical woman.
 
2002-01-14 10:24:15 AM
i'll do it for five bucks and a sandwhich
 
2002-01-14 10:27:38 AM
"My little kid needs a new ouse every month!"
 
Mog
2002-01-14 10:29:28 AM
"I also want a fresh Dodo egg for my son everyday for breakfast..."

She's just upset because she sucked at Tennis and couldn't make any large sum of money off of that.
 
2002-01-14 10:31:11 AM
are there any women on fark? if so, can one of you please explain why your pathetic gender feels the need to freeload so heartlessly?

wow. so hard not to be misogynist when 99.9% of women think like this bee-otch.
 
2002-01-14 10:32:15 AM
The kid in a few years:
 
2002-01-14 10:32:16 AM
This dude is 84 and has a 3 year old kid with a 36 year old woman? Man he got played big time! What an old idiot she deserves the money just for having sex with the old fart.
 
2002-01-14 10:33:13 AM
I wouldn't say it's that high - at least for the type of women who frequent fark. Maybe it's just women in the states?
 
2002-01-14 10:33:22 AM
Concur! It irks me to no end how these women seen to thing that the world owes them something for having a vagina
 
2002-01-14 10:34:33 AM
Also this biatch could have just waited a couple more years until the old dude just kills over then she could of had it all.
 
2002-01-14 10:35:28 AM
(previous comment addressed to Crazyeddie)
 
2002-01-14 10:36:30 AM
Reason 3986762367438375632486349786 not to get married!

farking coont
 
2002-01-14 10:38:12 AM
this biatch needs to be prank-called by RBCP. its only right. :D
 
2002-01-14 10:39:07 AM
His real mistake (post-coitus) was paying in excess of the stipulated amounts in the pre-nup; bad precedent to set. It's either shoddy journalism or terrible lawyering to characterize pre-nup amounts as "suggested" figures.
 
2002-01-14 10:41:04 AM
84 year old rich guy shtups attractive 34 year old girl. Gets her pregnant. Is outraged when she wants bazillion dollars?! Farkin idiot got just what he desrved. If he thinks she slept with him for any reason OTHER than a life time meal ticket, then I'd like him to invest in this great dot.com business I'm starting up.

Note: Gold-diggers get away with only as much as rich old coots allow them.
 
2002-01-14 10:41:06 AM
Crazyeddie & Katnine11, I agree with both of ya, but ya really don't beleive that this old guy really thought this woman actually loved him for his personality? Both knew in the back of their minds that she was just trophy high priced whore of a wife. I hope she gets all the money she needs to raise this soon to be brat of a child.
 
2002-01-14 10:43:18 AM
Do the math:

$320,000 / month x 12 months = $3.8 million per year.

$3.8 million / year x 12 years = $69 million

This guy has almost $7 Billion.

Thast means his child support is only 1% of his income...

I wish that were true in the real world... my child support would only be $16 / week instead of $400.
 
2002-01-14 10:43:39 AM
I feel sick after reading that crap. God forbid that she and the kid have to live a normal lifestyle like the rest of us.

I really can't believe she balked at the $70,000 a month she was already getting. And the fact that they signed a pre-nup stating he didn't have to give her a thing should make this a non-issue, if the judge has any sense.

Of course, the judge will probably end up being a woman and sympathize with her.
 
2002-01-14 10:44:38 AM
Goatman- LOL!
 
2002-01-14 10:44:44 AM
Dllsgrlz: You may have a point, but she should at least let the guy know what the rate is before turning on the meter to her mattress
 
2002-01-14 10:46:46 AM
That's the fu<king you get for the fu<king you got
 
2002-01-14 10:49:14 AM
Omegacerberus: You are confusing net worth and income, he surely doesn't make $7B a year.
 
2002-01-14 10:49:41 AM
Real Remon: Well said.

Bass555: Damn straight. At least be honest that you're doing it for the $$ and settle on a fair price where everyone is happy.

I ain't sayin it's right people. Just tellin it like it is.
 
2002-01-14 10:50:51 AM
Goatman: It was Robin Williams, not Robbie. Makes more sense now, huh?
 
2002-01-14 10:51:30 AM
women sympathizers: you would have a point if he weren't opposed to the marriage in the first place. She got a LAWYER to force them to MARRY? Even then he wouldn't do it without a pre-nup. And then they got divorced less than a month later.

Having sex with this guy once does not entitle her to live his lifestyle for the rest of her life.

someone PLEASE chop this woman's arms and legs off.
 
fj
2002-01-14 10:51:38 AM
It makes no sense. The cost of raising a child doesn't increase with your yearly salary. If these kids were anything other than a free meal ticket, child support would be capped at $40,000 a year. Anything more is to support the mother's lifestyle.
 
2002-01-14 10:53:11 AM
my TWO dogs live for three months on a $7 bag of dog food. What in the hell is this woman feeding that kids rabbits for $436 a month?

oh, and CRAZYEDDIE slowly look down at your right palm because if any of us of the "pathetic gender" you speak of should ever meet you, you will be glad you took great care of that appendage.
 
2002-01-14 10:54:00 AM
IcePick: It WAS Robin! Thank you. I always thought it was him, but twice have seen it attributed to Robbie. I can rest now, because Robbie Williams is a tit, whereas Robin is a genius with an extremely bad agent.
 
2002-01-14 10:55:59 AM
If I were Kerkorkian, I would be sueing the pants off of the lawyers who wrote the initial pre-nup. Why wasn't that thing bulletproof? Especially since the marriage was a sham in the first place.

Also child support is not alimony (as it notes in the article). Keep in mind that there is a separate alimony case pending on this. This woman makes me sick.
 
2002-01-14 10:56:45 AM
Okay. I rarely post. But you guys are showing such incredible ignorance I can't help it.

Child support, alimony, etcetera, are NOT freeloading.

Now first, I agree, especially since they signed the prenup, she should be perfectly happy with the money she's getting, which is more money than most 4-person families would dream of to support their entire household. She's obviously using the child as a means to her own greedy end, which is obnoxious.

But you people are showing such contempt for the very concept of alimony etc: I mean, Bass555 said: "It irks me to no end how these women seen to thing that the world owes them something for having a vagina." No, asshole! The concept of alimony comes from the simple fact that in the majority of marriages, one person makes the money, one person does the housework. Your average housewife (or househusband, for that matter) is not exactly in a prime position to get a decent job after 10 years of marriage right out of high school, for example, and has put so much time into building a home, raising kids, et cetera, that it's ludicrous for you to think that just because she didn't "make the money" that she doesn't deserve a chunk of it.

Forgive the lack of ideal articulation, it's not even 10AM and I haven't had my coffee.

Maybe THIS woman is a money-grubbing witch. But that doesn't give you free reign to talk shiat about all women who go after alimony or child support when they divorce.

-d
 
2002-01-14 10:59:24 AM
No problem, Goatman. Glad to be of service. I rever really understood the Brits' affection for that jerkoff, anyway.
 
fj
2002-01-14 11:00:06 AM
NhdanmOK, then split up the assets and then get a job. A woman might be entitled to some of the assets for her help, but not future earnings. Especially not future earnings that allow her to live like a queen.
 
2002-01-14 11:03:44 AM
what are you guys talking about? i guess no one really knows that all four year olds must have at least 144,000 dollars worth of travel, 14,000 dollars for parties and "playdates", and 4,3000 dollars for food a month along with the other expenses she has listed.(bitter sarcasm) I mean i understand that the guys a billionaire so perhaps he should want to give his a daughter a little more than most normal guys could affford but come on, it looks even more ridiculous when she see her rationalizing what she needs that kind of money for. farking biatch
 
Rei
2002-01-14 11:04:11 AM
Well, I don't know about all states, but I know that both Iowa and Texas are no-fault, no-alimony divorce states. Thus, it doesn't matter if one party initiated the divorce, was cheating, etc; and, there is no alimony in any circumstance. However, they *do* look at property and debt distribution based on earning potential.
 
2002-01-14 11:06:55 AM
Perpetual receipt of future income is freeloading -- the recipient is no longer adding value, how have they "earned" the right to that income stream? B/c life didn't work out the way you want? B/c you're "heartbroken?"
Hey -- not all women are money-grubbing ho's -- not even most, but enough certainly are to warrant protecting yourself as a would-be husband.
Child support is different, but the custody preference for women should be revisited b/c often it is just a thinly-veiled proxy for additional alimony. This assumes that both parent wanted the kid. If, hypothetically, the woman forced the child upon the man, then the kid should be on her dime.
 
2002-01-14 11:07:31 AM
Why do people hate rich people? I mean, that's what this is about, right?

It's like people being appalled at Michael Jordan losing $500K gambling. Who cares?

Brian
 
2002-01-14 11:08:47 AM
4,300 in food..holy fark..that is about 30,000 packets of Ramen. You could feel some small countries with that.
 
2002-01-14 11:09:20 AM
NhDanm: First of all, let's set the record straight, I do, in fact, have contempt for the concept of alimony, not child support. Secondly, read the farking article, asshole! This is not about a middle-class woman who spent 10 years raising her child at the expense of her earning power. As for the majority of marriages, I would submit that, in a preponderance of working families, both spouses are employed.

"Your average housewife (or househusband, for that matter) is not exactly in a prime position to get a decent job after 10 years of marriage right out of high school, for example, and has put so much time into building a home, raising kids, et cetera, that it's ludicrous for you to think that just because she didn't "make the money" that she doesn't deserve a chunk of it." <---what kind of isolated scenario is this? It hardly reflects the world as it is today. Get with the program...child support is one thing, overcompensating a matress-tester is something else..
 
2002-01-14 11:11:42 AM
NhDanm when a nasty divorce happens, does the man ever get back all the money he wasted on his money-grubbing wife or toys for the rugrats? No. What about the fact that now he has to do his own housework-- Does he ever sue for money to have a housekeeper or a cook?! hm?! NO. So why should the woman be entitled to ANYTHING?

Listen: Divorce is bad luck. It means that the couple no longer wants a relationship. The poor guy has to mop his own floors now...you don't hear him complaining. Now, if the woman was stupid enough to commit herself to an unfaithful man, etc and sacrifice 10 years of her life to watch soap operas and do laundry, that was HER decision. No one put a gun to her head. When the relationship ends, the man has to do housework, and the woman has to get a job. Case closed. We could save the judicial system a few billion each year if people realized this.

Women go after money/alimony/child support in a divorce because they know that the injustice of it will irk their ex, and because they are greedy. Not because they deserve it.

you are deluding yourself and rationalizing your greed if you think otherwise.
 
2002-01-14 11:13:29 AM
Nhdanm: I applaud you...thats what I was going to say

and to all of you saying any woman who sues for childsupport is in the wrong...whatever

admittedly this women is obviously a freeloading biatch but that doesn't mean that every woman is
 
Displayed 50 of 205 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report