[Peregrine]

(01-11-2014 05:35 AM)houston Wrote:  

Thanks Buja. So I'm guessing this whole system is a mess because of $$$?

Exactly. Cui bono?

[Ensam]

(01-10-2014 10:38 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 10:33 PM)runsonmagic Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 08:29 AM)Ensam Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 12:39 AM)runsonmagic Wrote:  

I tweeted about it. Looks amazing.

Narrated by Dr. Drew, who produced it after being involved in a bitter divorce and paying a fortune in court fees.

Do you have a source for this? As far as I know he's still happily married.

From his twitter:
https://twitter.com/drdrew/status/420252347231903744

I don't understand Twitter. Can somebody translate the tweet above? Since the way I read it is that Dr Drew is re-tweeting a tweet from somebody else. As opposed to tweeting about something that happened to him.

Is that right?

That's my understanding. I think runsonmagic misinterpreted the tweet. I listen to Adam and Dr. Drews podcast pretty regularly and if he were to go through a messy divorce I think it'd come up. His wife tweets https://twitter.com/Firstladyoflove and tweeted a picture from a flight they took together on Jan 8th. https://twitter.com/Firstladyoflove/stat...2365382656.

[Damascus]

This is how fucked up the system is. This father is JAILED for paying too much child support…ridiculous.

http://www.sott.net/article/271748-Fathe...ld-support

[reaper23]

(01-11-2014 08:43 PM)Damascus Wrote:  

This is how fucked up the system is. This father is JAILED for paying too much child support…ridiculous.

http://www.sott.net/article/271748-Fathe...ld-support

"However, nothing presented in the original KRIV-TV news account about this case actually stated that Hall "overpaid" child support; it quite clearly said that he paid nearly $3,000 in "back child support," indicating that he was paying an amount already past due (even if he was previously unaware he owed it), not overpaying an amount he didn't yet owe. And it seems that the basis of the contempt charge was Hall's failure to pay the required amount of child support on time, not his "overpaying" the specified amount. "

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/childsupport.asp

[Damascus]

I saw a screening of this film with my girlfriend yesterday. Mind blowing at how corrupt the family court system is in this country. I highly recommend that everyone go see and support this film. Even if you don't agree with everything being said a discussion needs to happen. Awareness is important regarding this issue. There is absolutely no incentive to get married the way the divorce laws are set up. I completely understand and sympathize with men who have been screwed over in family court and feel bitter.

I also wanted to gauge what my girlfriend's mindset is regarding divorce. She was angrier than me and stated that when she gets married divorce can't be an option no matter what. She doesn't comprehend how people can act so nasty to someone they promised to love, honor, and obey. She equated divorce in America to putting a bullet in your mouth and pulling the trigger. Then again I wasn't too surprised since her parents have been married for 37 years and she comes from a healthy family background. . I was astonished and how many constitutional violations that occur during proceedings in family court. There are no real checks and balances. Judges hold all the power and there are no consequences for false allegations that people make in order to get the leg up. My solution? Remove the financial incentives from divorce. Eliminate alimony. Make everything fair. Anything made during the divorce is split equally. Equal access to children. If there is shared custody then no child support. If there isn't put a cap on child support. Remove NO FAULT DIVORCE.

Go see this film.

[cardguy]

Hatred in divorce is no surprise to me. Since a majority of women settle for the guy they marry and never truly love them.

And when you don't love somebody - it is very easy to start hating them.

[Damascus]

(01-12-2014 07:36 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

Hatred in divorce is no surprise to me. Since a majority of women settle for the guy they marry and never truly love them.

And when you don't love somebody - it is very easy to start hating them.

Women settle for less than their ideal because they don't fit the criteria to get the man they want. Mothers should teach their daughters from a young age to be high value women so they can attract high value men.

Fathers need to teach their sons to not settle for mediocre poon and handle his business like a man so they can get submission and attract high quality women who don't have mental illness (an issue in the western world)

[cardguy]

It is true that men and women often both settle when getting in married. But the idealism and hamster is stronger in the man than the woman. Man has a need to believe in higher ideals - and when it comes to marriage this leads them to thinking they are the ones who got to marry their 'dream girl'.

[deuce]

Adam Carolla and Dr. Drew discussing the movie on their podcast:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-...mpt=uo%3D2

[cardguy]

So apparently in Scandinavia - child support is fixed for everybody. So whether you are broke or a billionaire - you pay the same amount of child support per kid.

Really weird imagining that in the USA and the UK.

Anybody here think that would be a good idea? I am still trying to wrap my head around it.

[Ensam]

(01-13-2014 04:24 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

So apparently in Scandinavia - child support is fixed for everybody. So whether you are broke or a billionaire - you pay the same amount of child support per kid.

Really weird imagining that in the USA and the UK.

Anybody here think that would be a good idea? I am still trying to wrap my head around it.

I think it's pretty reasonable. If you have full custody you can spend as much or as little money on your child as you'd like provided their basic needs are covered. Nobody considers it child abuse if a billionaire decides to send his kids to public schools and dress them in second hand clothing. Hell, people might even applaud it. Why should it be any different if you don't have custody of the kid? You should only be required to spend as much money as it takes to cover half of the kids basic needs.

The thing I find really crazy is that the custodial parent can decide how much of the child support to actually spend on the child with no accountability. There's absolutely no guarantee the child will see a penny of it.

[dads]

I'm starting to not feel bad for dude's that get taken to the cleaners on shit like this. Everyone is well aware of the reality that 50% of marriages nowadays end in divorce, and as a man you WILL BE FUCKED in a divorce. If you're a man, and you get married, best of luck. I could care less if they ever change these laws, because I will never get married. Be smart and work with the system you're in.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(01-13-2014 07:55 PM)Ensam Wrote:  

Nobody considers it child abuse if a billionaire decides to send his kids to public schools and dress them in second hand clothing. Hell, people might even applaud it.

[Collide]

The only people my age I know that got married were beta nerds from high school or white trash. Smart, rich, alpha men are opting out of marriage and the people still popping out babies are from low income neighborhoods.

I'm not looking forward to the next generation of kids.

[Cincinnatus]

(01-22-2014 09:20 AM)Collide Wrote:  

The only people my age I know that got married were beta nerds from high school or white trash. Smart, rich, alpha men are opting out of marriage and the people still popping out babies are from low income neighborhoods.

I'm not looking forward to the next generation of kids.

Scary to think about in my opinion. I'm mid-twenties and I'm not fond of my generation, or the late teens/early twenty-somethings that I manage. Their kids are going to make the knockout game look like innocent fun, I'm afraid.

[Suits]

(01-13-2014 04:24 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

So apparently in Scandinavia - child support is fixed for everybody. So whether you are broke or a billionaire - you pay the same amount of child support per kid.

Really weird imagining that in the USA and the UK.

Anybody here think that would be a good idea? I am still trying to wrap my head around it.

That makes wonderful sense. They've figured out how much it costs to raise a healthy kid and has dispensed with the "manner to which they have become accustomed" stupidity.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

I think that we won't see the much-awaited Mad Max world, mostly because the ever-increasing numbers of fucked-up kids (primarily male, since they're the most affected by the destruction of the traditional family) will be absorbed by sedatives, mood-controlling drugs, porn and similar outlets. Single motherhood has skyrocketed around the world, and it has been conclusively proven that it causes tremendous problems for children (15 times greater chance to become rapists, 5 times greater chance to commit suicide, etc.), yet the crime rate is mostly falling. How? The only explanation is that something must be absorbing or blunting the dysfunction.

Of course, the increasing masses of herbivores who subsist just on porn and refuse to man up and offer their balls and income on a silver platter (no offense to them, ofc.) will eventually cause the system to collapse. It has just delayed the inevitable implosion. Still, I believe it is going to be a quiet economic implosion, not a hypernova or senseless violence and crime.

[Collide]

(01-13-2014 07:04 AM)deuce Wrote:  

Adam Carolla and Dr. Drew discussing the movie on their podcast:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-...mpt=uo%3D2

Non-iTunes users can listen from here:

Podcast 108

[reaper23]

(01-22-2014 09:31 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 04:24 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

So apparently in Scandinavia - child support is fixed for everybody. So whether you are broke or a billionaire - you pay the same amount of child support per kid.

Really weird imagining that in the USA and the UK.

Anybody here think that would be a good idea? I am still trying to wrap my head around it.

That makes wonderful sense. They've figured out how much it costs to raise a healthy kid and has dispensed with the "manner to which they have become accustomed" stupidity.

no, no. if you have capitalism and the chance to make more money then the kid gets the benefit - thats the point of the system

socialists make it socialist, thats the point of the system

[Isaac Jordan]

Just finished watching this. Definitely worth a view, very powerful stuff.

What really amazed me was not just how much money is involved in the system (hint: tens of billions of dollars), but how incestuously intertwined the system is:

-Family court judges can appoint "evaluators" or even additional lawyers at will to a party's case and then force the litigant to pay their (often outrageous) fees. If the litigant doesn't pay, the judge can throw them in jail. And there's no jury-the judge is the sole determinant of the divorce proceedings. Got a sweet prenup? Doesn't matter if the judge doesn't like it. He's basically a vindictive teenager with a giant magnifying glass, and you are a teeny tiny insignificant powerless little ant.

-Attorneys regularly donate to the campaigns of their local court judges, and are statistically more likely to win a case involving a judge to whom they've donated (duh).

-Due to a lack of conflict of interest laws, a family court judge can retire on Monday, be hired as a consulting attorney by a local divorce law firm Tuesday, then quit and go back to being a judge Wednesday. Even worse, he could theoretically (and is actually pretty likely) to see attorneys that were on Tuesday his coworkers back in court Wednesday as litigators. This scenario is apparently rather common for retiring family court judges.

-Divorce attorneys often work in tandem to draw out cases as long as possible in order to rack up fees. If one side starts slinging mud, the other side pretty much has to respond in kind lest they lose and are forced to pay massive financial penalties. Children often end up being used as pawns, as child support can in many cases be worth more than alimony (and you don't have to pay taxes on child support).

-The state legislatures dole out money to the family courts based on metrics like case load and report filings. The longer and more difficult it becomes to wrap up a divorce, the more reports have to be filed, and the more third-party consultants and evaluators have to be involved (leading to more reports and work for the clerks), thereby increasing the amount of money the court system needs to operate. So basically, as the divorce process becomes longer and more complicated, everyone involved makes more money (except, of course, for those actually getting the divorce). There are zero incentives to enhance the efficiency or fairness of the system.

-The family court system is technically designated a "court of equity," as opposed to a court of law, and the regulatory agencies and checks and balances that exist to prevent courts of law from gaining too much power don't really exist for the family court system.

I always figured I'd settle down in my late thirties/early forties in order to raise a family, and while I knew marriage was a raw deal for men, I thought that if I did my prep work beforehand (moved/hid assets, drafted an amazing prenup, etc.) and expected to get divorced at some point, I could at least handle it should it occur. Hope for the best but expect the worst, that sort of thing. I thought that while most men get screwed because they never dream of getting served with divorce papers, that if I hedged my bets I'd be alright.

After seeing this film, though, there's just no way I'm getting married in the U.S. No fucking way. I want nothing to do with that system. No amount of prep work is worth the risk. I'll look into marriage outside the country, perhaps, or see if I can raise children with a woman without being looped into a common-law marriage. But after seeing this, any sort of marriage in the U.S. is no longer an option whatsoever.

[spokepoker]

Can Americans get divorced in Scandinavia?
edit;
Just watched it, and yeah, never gonna get married.

[Suits]

(01-23-2014 10:02 AM)reaper23 Wrote:  

(01-22-2014 09:31 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 04:24 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

So apparently in Scandinavia - child support is fixed for everybody. So whether you are broke or a billionaire - you pay the same amount of child support per kid.

Really weird imagining that in the USA and the UK.

Anybody here think that would be a good idea? I am still trying to wrap my head around it.

That makes wonderful sense. They've figured out how much it costs to raise a healthy kid and has dispensed with the "manner to which they have become accustomed" stupidity.

no, no. if you have capitalism and the chance to make more money then the kid gets the benefit - thats the point of the system

socialists make it socialist, thats the point of the system

No, then the mother gets the money.

Courtesy, of course, of the feminist employing "non-profit" agency authorized by the family courts to collect as much money as they can squeeze out of the father each month.

The problem is not socialism.

The problem is the systemic corruption of capitalism.

[Suits]

I finished watching the film last night.

It was a little painful to watch, because I know that men are the primary victims of the divorce system. The producers of this film were careful to focus on as many examples of women being abused by the system, although a lot of the issues they talked about (false abuse accusations and how the breadwinning party has to pay for both lawyers, for example) clearly means male victims. The film, however, never even broached this reality.

It was a clever move on the producers part to be very careful to focus on women who have been hurt by the system as much as possible.

If they'd focused on the prevalent victims (children and men), the film wouldn't meet mainstream acceptance. So, they have a product that might make a difference.

Still, it was hard to watch, because a very large portion of the film was interviews with women who had been screwed over. And we all know that it's not the women who usually get screwed over the hardest.

[Vacancier Permanent]

Does anyone have a link to watch this film online?

Thanks.

Marriage in the US/Canada and the rest of the Anglosphere and or with a western women's is akin to financial suicide and riun. Only a fool would do so.

Rule #1: Don't get married in the Anglosphere. And don't marry a western woman.

IF you want to get married, do so in a country with sane laws where the woman and the culture and society are traditional.

Rule #2: Do NOT bring her to live in the Anglosphere. Within 2-3 years, the system and the women she will come into contact will corrupt her. Keep her in her country!

[Suits]

(01-07-2015 12:37 AM)Vacancier Permanent Wrote:  

Rule #2: Do NOT bring her to live in the Anglosphere. Within 2-3 years, the system and the women she will come into contact will corrupt her. Keep her in her country!

The problem is that few men from the Anglosphere are really properly equipped to live happily outside that world. Sure, plenty of people take glorified vacations (study abroad, teaching English for a year or two), but once you cross the three year line, you realize that if you don't make any decision to leave, you'll literally be spending the rest of your life wherever you are.

That's all fine and good until you take into consideration your current and future earning potential and standard of living in that location and ask yourself whether that's as good as I could get for you.

I have very happily crossed the 3 year line in China and have no plans to leave, but I know few others capable of my level of commitment.

Part of my level of comfort comes from the fact that I know that I do and will make more money in China (in comparison to my Canadian homeland) for at least the next ten years and I speak the language, so daily tasks that might otherwise be onerous, come to me with ease.

Most of the long termers here (from the Anglosphere) are losers who don't have good options in China, but have even worse options back home. The motivate types come for a couple years and then move onto greener pastures. And you can blame them?

There are more comfortable places, with easier more attractive women, such as the Philippines, but how does the average guy make money there? Even Thailand, where you can teacher English fairly accessible, doesn't offer much of a future, because who wants a 30-40 year career teaching little brats how to not speak English.

If you really want a life outside of the Anglosphere, it's totally achievable, but few will chose it because:

1 - They miss driving cars/gun ownership/good beer/friends who can handle a meaningful conversation/etc

2 - Too far from family.

3 - They can't be bothered to learn a foreign language.

4 - Each new country comes with it's own list of problems that may make the Anglosphere look good by comparison.