Pre-nups are risky, you will be at the whim of the judge as to whether it is totally/partially enforceable, and remember that the court is a court of equity(fairness). Yes, co-habitating can result in a common law marriage. CLM requires holding yourself out to the public as husband and wife as well as the intent of both parties to live as H&W usually symbolized by some sort of event or happening. Your best course of action is to take affirmative steps documenting there was never any intent to be married, but again, they will try to get you.
Divorce-Proofing Your Life
Fall in love? What's that?
Why do you need a marriage contract to have a marriage? You can still put rings on each other's fingers, have the party, act like a husband and wife, cohabit and have kids. Just stay out a place with common law marriage.
Child support is the real tricky bit.
Child support is the real tricky bit.
In theory you could just take out an ad in a local newspaper once a year advertising the fact that you are not married, or something of the like.
Quote: (06-17-2013 01:37 PM)Anaguma Wrote:
WallStreetOasis' idea is probably not practical to a lot of people, especially since it is rather difficult to open a foreign account.
I have given a lot of thought to this question, and here is an idea that I have been toying with, but I don't know how well this will work in reality.
Nevada offers self-directed spendthrift trusts which, if properly drafted in advance, are immune to all creditors, including alimony and child support.
It seems so hard to believe Nevada bureaucrats will refuse a demand for child support from , say Calif or texas, wherever-- for child support.
Can you cite sources? I thought all states totally cooperated with each other on child support.
Quote: (06-19-2013 02:51 PM)JWAP Wrote:
Quote: (06-19-2013 02:01 PM)malc Wrote:
Just stay out a place with common law marriage.
Child support is the real tricky bit.
What/where are examples where such a common law marriage does not apply? I really have no interest in living in less developed countries.
Many many places in the world! Even in crazy California. Only 9 states in the USA right now:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage
Quote: (06-19-2013 06:59 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:
Quote: (06-17-2013 01:37 PM)Anaguma Wrote:
WallStreetOasis' idea is probably not practical to a lot of people, especially since it is rather difficult to open a foreign account.
I have given a lot of thought to this question, and here is an idea that I have been toying with, but I don't know how well this will work in reality.
Nevada offers self-directed spendthrift trusts which, if properly drafted in advance, are immune to all creditors, including alimony and child support.
It seems so hard to believe Nevada bureaucrats will refuse a demand for child support from , say Calif or texas, wherever-- for child support.
Can you cite sources? I thought all states totally cooperated with each other on child support.
Immune to child support is meaningless if you are not immune to arrest. They demand the money, and jail you till you come up with it.
1) Ahhhh.....get a chick with money if you are going to marry.
2) Men need to stop falling for age-old traditional things like the "I want to make all the money, pay all the bills and my wife just stands and look pretty" bullsh*t.
3) I am not trying to marry some chick from 10,000 miles away IN HOPES that she never learns the Western mindset.
4) Not to rub my fellow African-American men the wrong way, but I am not enamored by any non-black chick....just because she is non-black.
5) I never understood why a man would work so hard in college, work so hard in the corporate world...only to marry some chick who brings NOTHING financially to the table.
My rule: If a chick doesn't bring in at least 75-80% of your income HERSELF (like you make $100K and she makes 75/80K)....you should not marry her.
In most divorce cases, the more she makes/has.....the less you have to pay out.
2) Men need to stop falling for age-old traditional things like the "I want to make all the money, pay all the bills and my wife just stands and look pretty" bullsh*t.
3) I am not trying to marry some chick from 10,000 miles away IN HOPES that she never learns the Western mindset.
4) Not to rub my fellow African-American men the wrong way, but I am not enamored by any non-black chick....just because she is non-black.
5) I never understood why a man would work so hard in college, work so hard in the corporate world...only to marry some chick who brings NOTHING financially to the table.
My rule: If a chick doesn't bring in at least 75-80% of your income HERSELF (like you make $100K and she makes 75/80K)....you should not marry her.
In most divorce cases, the more she makes/has.....the less you have to pay out.
Quote: (06-19-2013 06:59 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:
It seems so hard to believe Nevada bureaucrats will refuse a demand for child support from , say Calif or texas, wherever-- for child support.
Can you cite sources? I thought all states totally cooperated with each other on child support.
The law regarding self settled trusts in Nevada is codified here, which makes no exceptions for alimony or child support (unlike most other states):
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-166.h...S166Sec170
Here is an attorney's article on the matter:
https://www.raineydevine.com/practice-ar...ion-trust/
Also the recent bill passed in the Nevada legislature appeared to emphasize the immunity of self settled trusts from creditors, including alimony/child support:
http://blog.trustprovident.com/2011/07/2...-bill-221/
Basically, only assets transferred within the last two years into the self settled trust can be claimed by the creditors. From other attorney articles and bar decisions that you can search on Google, it appears that yes, if you are in a Nevada court with a self settled trust, those assets cannot be reached for alimony or child support.
However, as DarkTriad noted,
Quote: (06-23-2013 11:19 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:
Immune to child support is meaningless if you are not immune to arrest. They demand the money, and jail you till you come up with it.
If you somehow end up in front of a family court judge outside of Nevada and they somehow manage to keep jurisdiction, they may hold you in contempt of court for not paying out from your self settled trust if their laws don't recognize such things (pretty much everywhere else), so it is meaningless if you are in jail.
So to make it work, keep your assets in Nevada, get a Nevada marriage license, make sure you and your wife never visit another state long enough to qualify for residency in that state (especially for states that do not respect the self settled trust), and don't work so child support is set to zero or something negligible. That makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a family law judge to keep jurisdiction over your divorce outside of Nevada, and any damage from a divorce should be rather small financially.
Though I think the above is more practical for someone who is wealthy enough to live off of the self settled trust.
Quote: (06-24-2013 02:38 AM)Anaguma Wrote:Law is wherever you have residency at the time is what court takes presence.
Quote: (06-19-2013 06:59 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:
It seems so hard to believe Nevada bureaucrats will refuse a demand for child support from , say Calif or texas, wherever-- for child support.
Can you cite sources? I thought all states totally cooperated with each other on child support.
The law regarding self settled trusts in Nevada is codified here, which makes no exceptions for alimony or child support (unlike most other states):
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-166.h...S166Sec170
Here is an attorney's article on the matter:
https://www.raineydevine.com/practice-ar...ion-trust/
Also the recent bill passed in the Nevada legislature appeared to emphasize the immunity of self settled trusts from creditors, including alimony/child support:
http://blog.trustprovident.com/2011/07/2...-bill-221/
Basically, only assets transferred within the last two years into the self settled trust can be claimed by the creditors. From other attorney articles and bar decisions that you can search on Google, it appears that yes, if you are in a Nevada court with a self settled trust, those assets cannot be reached for alimony or child support.
However, as DarkTriad noted,
Quote: (06-23-2013 11:19 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:
Immune to child support is meaningless if you are not immune to arrest. They demand the money, and jail you till you come up with it.
If you somehow end up in front of a family court judge outside of Nevada and they somehow manage to keep jurisdiction, they may hold you in contempt of court for not paying out from your self settled trust if their laws don't recognize such things (pretty much everywhere else), so it is meaningless if you are in jail.
So to make it work, keep your assets in Nevada, get a Nevada marriage license, make sure you and your wife never visit another state long enough to qualify for residency in that state (especially for states that do not respect the self settled trust), and don't work so child support is set to zero or something negligible. That makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a family law judge to keep jurisdiction over your divorce outside of Nevada, and any damage from a divorce should be rather small financially.
Though I think the above is more practical for someone who is wealthy enough to live off of the self settled trust.
Quote: (06-24-2013 02:38 AM)Anaguma Wrote:
The law regarding self settled trusts in Nevada is codified here, which makes no exceptions for alimony or child support (unlike most other states):
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-166.h...S166Sec170
Here is an attorney's article on the matter:
https://www.raineydevine.com/practice-ar...ion-trust/
Also the recent bill passed in the Nevada legislature appeared to emphasize the immunity of self settled trusts from creditors, including alimony/child support:
http://blog.trustprovident.com/2011/07/2...-bill-221/
........
Though I think the above is more practical for someone who is wealthy enough to live off of the self settled trust.
Wow, that's informative.
So from what I could tell, I can save up, buy a plot of land in Nevada and put a trailer on it (I'm on a budget) , put the property in a spendthrift trust and no future ex-wife can get at it.
However, the IRS can get at anything I believe, correct, because Federal law supersedes State laws?
Quote: (06-24-2013 12:04 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:
Wow, that's informative.
So from what I could tell, I can save up, buy a plot of land in Nevada and put a trailer on it (I'm on a budget) , put the property in a spendthrift trust and no future ex-wife can get at it.
However, the IRS can get at anything I believe, correct, because Federal law supersedes State laws?
That is what it looks like. You can also include other assets too, like bank accounts, stocks/401k and what not, and any money transferred from the trust to you should not be reachable by creditors. Though I will have to look more into that aspect of it.
You will have to pay federal income tax on gains made by the trust, and they have their own separate rates. However, Nevada does not tax trust income and there are no property taxes, so it is not bad at all.
How do you cancel proof a prenup by the judge if the girl says she was under duress? Was reading a book on Trump the other day where it said his first wife sought (successfully??) to cancel the prenup she signed and agreed to.
Just don't get married.
Had a kid with my ex but we never got married just co-habited. Got as far as proposing but never actually went through with it.
Am just on the hook for child support as there are no laws in the UK that automatically convert this into some form of common-law marriage b#llshit (one of very few things to be thankful for for living in the UK).
![[Image: wp-content-uploads-2008-11-neo.jpg]](http://mauitime.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/wp-content-uploads-2008-11-neo.jpg)
Had a kid with my ex but we never got married just co-habited. Got as far as proposing but never actually went through with it.
Am just on the hook for child support as there are no laws in the UK that automatically convert this into some form of common-law marriage b#llshit (one of very few things to be thankful for for living in the UK).
Can you get divorce raped in a common law marriage?
Growth Over Everything Else.
Can you get away with putting money into a bank account in a family member's name (that you trust) over time like a savings account, so that it's not technically tied to you?
Nice thread, something I often think about, my uncle is a high priced lawyer and I have talked to him regarding the issue and he said he would help me manage my assets should the time arrive.
However I think ultimately there are going to be 3 main things you want to cover:
1. Your home
2. Your money
and 3. Your kids
I can't speak much about custody of children, however I am aware of the following loopholes regarding house ownership and money so:
1. If and when I buy a house, I would not do it in my name, but rather have my parents do it for me (the only people I can truly trust in my life), legally speaking your "mortgage" would actually be your rent, that you pay to your parents, none of this is legally in your name or her name and she has no claim to your parents possessions in a divorce court, any complications that arise out of the rent agreement would be settled by the landlord (your parents). This is obviously good short term, if you are an only child you will have to cross the bridge of handing over assets upon death of your parents when the time comes, that would be tricky, but if you have siblings you also trust to continue the same procedure, that could also be an option.
2. Personally I am a big fan of Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin to be more specific, at this point in time, I would just keep most of my savings in that. It is completely unaccounted for, untraceable and there is very little legislation that would otherwise lay claim to it.
However I think ultimately there are going to be 3 main things you want to cover:
1. Your home
2. Your money
and 3. Your kids
I can't speak much about custody of children, however I am aware of the following loopholes regarding house ownership and money so:
1. If and when I buy a house, I would not do it in my name, but rather have my parents do it for me (the only people I can truly trust in my life), legally speaking your "mortgage" would actually be your rent, that you pay to your parents, none of this is legally in your name or her name and she has no claim to your parents possessions in a divorce court, any complications that arise out of the rent agreement would be settled by the landlord (your parents). This is obviously good short term, if you are an only child you will have to cross the bridge of handing over assets upon death of your parents when the time comes, that would be tricky, but if you have siblings you also trust to continue the same procedure, that could also be an option.
2. Personally I am a big fan of Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin to be more specific, at this point in time, I would just keep most of my savings in that. It is completely unaccounted for, untraceable and there is very little legislation that would otherwise lay claim to it.
Just marry someone as wealthy or wealthier than you. Problem solved.
In Australia you are considered married after a brief period of "living as a man and a woman" and she gets your stuff.
If you hide or move money to avoid divorce rape, you will go to jail.
If you give it away, sell cheap etc, it will be seized back, and you will have a debt and/or go to jail.
Trusts, assets owned by others will be deemed yours and given to her.
Prenups will be discarded and your stuff will be given to her.
if you take a lower paid job to avoid the 18 years child support, they will make a number up as your deemed income "without the burden of proof" and you will be required to pay that amount.
Its a huge industry this divorce rape, and there is a lot of money in it for the vultures.
Seven Aussie men a week neck themselves who are under attack by the family court here.
Things have to change, but I don't know how to do it.
If you hide or move money to avoid divorce rape, you will go to jail.
If you give it away, sell cheap etc, it will be seized back, and you will have a debt and/or go to jail.
Trusts, assets owned by others will be deemed yours and given to her.
Prenups will be discarded and your stuff will be given to her.
if you take a lower paid job to avoid the 18 years child support, they will make a number up as your deemed income "without the burden of proof" and you will be required to pay that amount.
Its a huge industry this divorce rape, and there is a lot of money in it for the vultures.
Seven Aussie men a week neck themselves who are under attack by the family court here.
Things have to change, but I don't know how to do it.
I spent 4 years fighting my Ex for my money as custody of the kids was never a issue. Also if your self employed that's where disputed happens as they is always a matter of difference of a person's real income and personal expenses being put the business. I almost went broke with the lawyers, accountants and valuators, etc.
Always
1) Get a pre-nup but that may not help if the agreement countervenes the local laws where you live. Never put anything in her name unless she came to the marriage with it before and document both parties financial assets at the time of marriage.
2) If you get married be sure to live in a 3rd different county and never sponsor her to become a citizen of your home country. In that case unless you have a ton of money it is not worth it usually financially to get enforcement of the laws of the local country where the marriage took place to another jurisdiction.
3) If you planning a divorce make sure to secretly check the implications with a good experienced family lawyer and a accountant before pulling the trigger.
I'm not a lawyer but it feels like I bloody well could be one as I lost nearly 80% of assets fighting the legal fatigue women are allowed to use.
Always
1) Get a pre-nup but that may not help if the agreement countervenes the local laws where you live. Never put anything in her name unless she came to the marriage with it before and document both parties financial assets at the time of marriage.
2) If you get married be sure to live in a 3rd different county and never sponsor her to become a citizen of your home country. In that case unless you have a ton of money it is not worth it usually financially to get enforcement of the laws of the local country where the marriage took place to another jurisdiction.
3) If you planning a divorce make sure to secretly check the implications with a good experienced family lawyer and a accountant before pulling the trigger.
I'm not a lawyer but it feels like I bloody well could be one as I lost nearly 80% of assets fighting the legal fatigue women are allowed to use.
I suggest you gents read this thread: thread-51744.html
2 main takeways: 1)Don't have your money in the marriage jurisdiction
2)If it gets bad enough, you must be willing to leave that country and never return.
2 main takeways: 1)Don't have your money in the marriage jurisdiction
2)If it gets bad enough, you must be willing to leave that country and never return.
Quote: (06-16-2013 09:58 PM)bacon Wrote:
The thing is marriage at its core is a business contract. All of these offshore/hiding money in overseas bank accounts is just playing with fire because if you have assests a forensic accountant can find it.
I really dont get why anyone who is not very religious needs marriage. Why can´t two people just live together, have kids etc without getting the state and the church to sign off on your relationship?
For me I want to marry a girl in a third world country and take her to first world places for travel-- (NOT the USA for obvious divorce rape reasons.) But European countries. Getting her listed as a wife is just about the only way to go see the Tour de France with her.
Plus she'll be alive about 30-40 years after I'm dead. I want to let her get out of the third world.
http://www.realworlddivorce.com/
I've mentioned this site before. It gives an extensive breakdown on all 50 US states and some foreign countries with regards to how divorce and child support works. It is VERY detailed and uses the same set of examples so you can compare and contrast states easily.
In short: I would say Texas is the overall best US state to raise a family; whether it's with a domestic or foreign girl. Disclaimer: I haven't verified this information directly with a lawyer; the following is based on research only. Results/outcomes may vary.
1. Child support is capped AND is set to a relatively low amount (not as low as Nevada - 13k-ish - but close - around 17k/year for the first kid). So if you make big money, you are not going to get raped on child support in a worst case situation. We are talking potential five figure savings A YEAR compared to many other retarded states; mostly libtard states like New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts where women can REALLY rape the hell out of you on child support given the very anti-male/anti-provider laws. Many states have UNCAPPED child support laws.
If you make good money in these states, a woman has a very strong incentive to leave you, claim child support and live off the money. However, a woman will think twice about blowing things up when she will only get 17k/year vs 45k/year for example. Capped child support also reduces the odds of a abortion extortion; where a woman will demand a large lump sum payment (100-200k) to get an abortion. Cheaper to pay that than 1 million+ over the next 18-21 years. I shit you not, it's a real thing. Read the Massachusetts page on the above website to learn more. They talk about chicks from EE/foreign countries coming to MA for summer work intentionally to get knocked up and do abortion extortions; getting huge paydays via the process. It's really vile shit but doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Incentivize cunts to act like cunts? Well, they will act like cunts then!
2. Pre/Post-nups are strongly recognized, enforceable and virtually anything can be put in a contract aside from how child support payments are managed; which has a very defined formula already and can be budgeted for.
I like this so I can sell a chick MY PLAN: X amount of money only AFTER kids have left the house; set-up in a fashion to incentivize her to NOT blow up the marriage until at least the kids are out of the house. Leave early? All you are getting is a low capped child support. In pretty much all states, default marriage laws incentivize women to blow up marriages well before the kids are out of the house and a marriage blown up early with default divorce laws creates a massive financial/time burden if you are a sole/primary provider. This must be prevented at all cost or you lose tons of leverage once shacked up with a woman.
Since I want to be a sole provider, I don't think it's unreasonable to give a woman a SMALL payday after 20-25 years of taking care of the kids/domestic duties. Not divorce rape levels with massive paydays and lifetime alimony checks; just enough to survive briefly for 6-12 months to start a new life.
That's a fair deal to all parties. She gets provisioning for 20 years; I get meals/domestic stuff/child care taken care of. The modern concept of divorce where I still have to pay for her shit but I don't get the benefits of a housewife is straight up ridiculous, evil, and gives women enormous unfair leverage in a marriage. My deal makes things mostly right and largely restores a man's proper and fair leverage. Any chick that balks to my deal obviously has other ill intentions and isn't truly committed to making the marriage work and be successful.
3. No state income tax.
4. Diverse and strong economy/pro-business
5. Cheap housing/land.
6. Conservative and strong self-defense/gun ownership laws.
The biggest risk in Texas and really any state is something called "forum-shopping." It's when a woman looks for the most favorable/highest payout jurisdiction to do a divorce/claim child support as oppose to your home state. I have been a HUGE advocate of NOT getting married as a protection tool since the dawn of time but I recently discovered that a great reason to get married in a place like Texas is to prevent a woman from "forum-shopping."
If for example you knock up a chick while not married, she could just bounce to another state with insane child support laws and clean you out; especially if the sex occurred in that state and/or she lives there.
If however you are legally married to some chick and she wants to blow up the marriage, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for her to file a divorce/child support claim in another state. Since some states have very stupid and evil divorce/child support laws, I think it is absolutely critical to do everything possible to ensure that a divorce/child support claim occurs in the state of your choice with the most favorable laws. Perhaps you can put that in the post-nup agreement as an added protection measure as well.
The Alternatives:
1. Set-up a trust in a single state (Nevada) that virtually no else recognizes OR in a foreign country? Where even if the money is protected in the best case, you can still be sent to prison for not paying? And in a state (Nevada) with a non-robust economy? (excluding a few fields in Vegas?). Not a great plan.
2. Marry a woman who makes a lot of money? Get the fuck outta of here. How many feminine submissive women do you know who make good money to begin with? Who is going to handle primary childcare/domestic duties? If she stops working, which many career women eventually do, it's YOUR CURRENT INCOME that is going to matter; not how she made 100k 7 years ago. Married/had kids in the wrong state? Hello divorce rape.
3. Goto a foreign country? Gonna have to deal with even more corrupt courts and a culture of which you only have a small understanding of. Good luck getting a pre-nup/post-nup enforced in these countries.
4. Don't get married but have kids? You have a high risk of being a victim of the previously mentioned "forum-shopping" maneuver; getting cleaned out by a stupid states laws that you don't even live in.
5. Become a house bitch and the woman is the provider? Fuck that. No thanks.
Bottom line:
Anyhow, I've long said that I can handle the cultural bullshit with regards to marriage. There are pro-family communities within the US and not all the women suck ass and you can import as well. It's the FINANCIAL risk that scares the ever living hell out of me. But after extensive research, I believe the aforementioned is the best deal for the majority of people to realistically do the marriage/family thing successfully (if a native US citizen) while also protecting yourself financially. It's not perfect but it's about as good as its gonna get.
I've mentioned this site before. It gives an extensive breakdown on all 50 US states and some foreign countries with regards to how divorce and child support works. It is VERY detailed and uses the same set of examples so you can compare and contrast states easily.
In short: I would say Texas is the overall best US state to raise a family; whether it's with a domestic or foreign girl. Disclaimer: I haven't verified this information directly with a lawyer; the following is based on research only. Results/outcomes may vary.
1. Child support is capped AND is set to a relatively low amount (not as low as Nevada - 13k-ish - but close - around 17k/year for the first kid). So if you make big money, you are not going to get raped on child support in a worst case situation. We are talking potential five figure savings A YEAR compared to many other retarded states; mostly libtard states like New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts where women can REALLY rape the hell out of you on child support given the very anti-male/anti-provider laws. Many states have UNCAPPED child support laws.
If you make good money in these states, a woman has a very strong incentive to leave you, claim child support and live off the money. However, a woman will think twice about blowing things up when she will only get 17k/year vs 45k/year for example. Capped child support also reduces the odds of a abortion extortion; where a woman will demand a large lump sum payment (100-200k) to get an abortion. Cheaper to pay that than 1 million+ over the next 18-21 years. I shit you not, it's a real thing. Read the Massachusetts page on the above website to learn more. They talk about chicks from EE/foreign countries coming to MA for summer work intentionally to get knocked up and do abortion extortions; getting huge paydays via the process. It's really vile shit but doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Incentivize cunts to act like cunts? Well, they will act like cunts then!
2. Pre/Post-nups are strongly recognized, enforceable and virtually anything can be put in a contract aside from how child support payments are managed; which has a very defined formula already and can be budgeted for.
I like this so I can sell a chick MY PLAN: X amount of money only AFTER kids have left the house; set-up in a fashion to incentivize her to NOT blow up the marriage until at least the kids are out of the house. Leave early? All you are getting is a low capped child support. In pretty much all states, default marriage laws incentivize women to blow up marriages well before the kids are out of the house and a marriage blown up early with default divorce laws creates a massive financial/time burden if you are a sole/primary provider. This must be prevented at all cost or you lose tons of leverage once shacked up with a woman.
Since I want to be a sole provider, I don't think it's unreasonable to give a woman a SMALL payday after 20-25 years of taking care of the kids/domestic duties. Not divorce rape levels with massive paydays and lifetime alimony checks; just enough to survive briefly for 6-12 months to start a new life.
That's a fair deal to all parties. She gets provisioning for 20 years; I get meals/domestic stuff/child care taken care of. The modern concept of divorce where I still have to pay for her shit but I don't get the benefits of a housewife is straight up ridiculous, evil, and gives women enormous unfair leverage in a marriage. My deal makes things mostly right and largely restores a man's proper and fair leverage. Any chick that balks to my deal obviously has other ill intentions and isn't truly committed to making the marriage work and be successful.
3. No state income tax.
4. Diverse and strong economy/pro-business
5. Cheap housing/land.
6. Conservative and strong self-defense/gun ownership laws.
The biggest risk in Texas and really any state is something called "forum-shopping." It's when a woman looks for the most favorable/highest payout jurisdiction to do a divorce/claim child support as oppose to your home state. I have been a HUGE advocate of NOT getting married as a protection tool since the dawn of time but I recently discovered that a great reason to get married in a place like Texas is to prevent a woman from "forum-shopping."
If for example you knock up a chick while not married, she could just bounce to another state with insane child support laws and clean you out; especially if the sex occurred in that state and/or she lives there.
If however you are legally married to some chick and she wants to blow up the marriage, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for her to file a divorce/child support claim in another state. Since some states have very stupid and evil divorce/child support laws, I think it is absolutely critical to do everything possible to ensure that a divorce/child support claim occurs in the state of your choice with the most favorable laws. Perhaps you can put that in the post-nup agreement as an added protection measure as well.
The Alternatives:
1. Set-up a trust in a single state (Nevada) that virtually no else recognizes OR in a foreign country? Where even if the money is protected in the best case, you can still be sent to prison for not paying? And in a state (Nevada) with a non-robust economy? (excluding a few fields in Vegas?). Not a great plan.
2. Marry a woman who makes a lot of money? Get the fuck outta of here. How many feminine submissive women do you know who make good money to begin with? Who is going to handle primary childcare/domestic duties? If she stops working, which many career women eventually do, it's YOUR CURRENT INCOME that is going to matter; not how she made 100k 7 years ago. Married/had kids in the wrong state? Hello divorce rape.
3. Goto a foreign country? Gonna have to deal with even more corrupt courts and a culture of which you only have a small understanding of. Good luck getting a pre-nup/post-nup enforced in these countries.
4. Don't get married but have kids? You have a high risk of being a victim of the previously mentioned "forum-shopping" maneuver; getting cleaned out by a stupid states laws that you don't even live in.
5. Become a house bitch and the woman is the provider? Fuck that. No thanks.
Bottom line:
Anyhow, I've long said that I can handle the cultural bullshit with regards to marriage. There are pro-family communities within the US and not all the women suck ass and you can import as well. It's the FINANCIAL risk that scares the ever living hell out of me. But after extensive research, I believe the aforementioned is the best deal for the majority of people to realistically do the marriage/family thing successfully (if a native US citizen) while also protecting yourself financially. It's not perfect but it's about as good as its gonna get.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)