I don't know what you meant by the children. Was it that the guy should let the women have the house and pay for it due to the children living there?
Yes , there are men who does. There are men who have 3 to 5 wives and all this wives and ex are well provided with house, cars and even the children schools and stuff.
There are women who sometimes never re-marry who passed the house to the eldest son or divide the property to all her children .
and I don't think that makes them a less of a man!
Is there anywhere in the world where a woman can have several husbands legally? lol
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- God Bless America - God Bless Immigrants - God Bless Poor Misguided Souls Too Mr S.U.
Speed, why not the husband retaining title so he can insure the eldest son/daughter gets it? When the women remarries the new guy will not respect the x-husband's wishes. No obligation to. Actually he will have claim to the property by virtue of community property, improvement, and commingling of funds. With that, if he has any kids they will have a stronger claim against it than the X.
The situation you described couldn't happen, not here. A bank would not carry the loan based on a divorce settlement. They are under no obligation to honor it or separate the two and title could not pass without a bargained for exchange. Not to say it can't be written in the divorce decree and the judge sign off on it. But in the real world it would have very little force and affect. Much like those silly agreements as to who is going to pay off the joint credit cards. Visa/Master card doesn't care what you agreed to. What matters is the contracts originally signed. If one defaults they go after the other. Divorce agreement matters not.
Another item to consider is future behavior. You can't mandate someone's future acts in a divorce agreement. In other words you can't have the x-wife promise not to remarry to prevent another guy from gaining an equitable share in it. Or have her agree not to have kids with someone else. And you can not mandate a prenuptial that performs the same affects either. The idea of divorce is a complete parting of the ways.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
Posts: 5805 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007
Originally posted by Sprint_girl07: Is there anywhere in the world where a woman can have several husbands legally? lol
What you are talking about is Polyandry. It has occured in Mongolia, Tibet, Shr Lanka, and Nepal, that I know of. Of course, it also happened a long time ago.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre
Originally posted by davdah: Speed, why not the husband retaining title so he can insure the eldest son/daughter gets it? When the women remarries the new guy will not respect the x-husband's wishes. No obligation to. Actually he will have claim to the property by virtue of community property, improvement, and commingling of funds. With that, if he has any kids they will have a stronger claim against it than the X.
The situation you described couldn't happen, not here. A bank would not carry the loan based on a divorce settlement. They are under no obligation to honor it or separate the two and title could not pass without a bargained for exchange. Not to say it can't be written in the divorce decree and the judge sign off on it. But in the real world it would have very little force and affect. Much like those silly agreements as to who is going to pay off the joint credit cards. Visa/Master card doesn't care what you agreed to. What matters is the contracts originally signed. If one defaults they go after the other. Divorce agreement matters not.
Another item to consider is future behavior. You can't mandate someone's future acts in a divorce agreement. In other words you can't have the x-wife promise not to remarry to prevent another guy from gaining an equitable share in it. Or have her agree not to have kids with someone else. And you can not mandate a prenuptial that performs the same affects either. The idea of divorce is a complete parting of the ways.
I take it you have not watched KENS TV in a while, have you?
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre
Originally posted by MakeItRight!: Unless its 2008 Where the market is so bad most will be lucky not to become a Negative in Property Values!!! WHY?????
Whats Happened To this Country?????
Too many crooked loan companies and realtors putting people in homes they couldn't afford. Now its time to pay. Think its bad now? The fed is trying to prop up the market by not raising rates. Why? Most people got adjustable rate mortgages. Or worse, interest only adjustable rate mortgages. Guess what happens when the prime rate begins to climb? Defaults like you wouldn't believe.
We saw some of it when the rate went up for a short time in 06. That is what caused the bubble burst we have now. They lowered it to prevent a colapse. But this is only a temporary fix. The rate can't stay at 5% for the next 20+ years until all these people pay off their mortgages or trust deeds. The values have fallen due to the glut of forclosures and changing loan practices. I should say the forced changes. They were compelled to make more honest loans. Less loans and more houses equates to lower overall property values.
the areas that have been hardest hit were overvalued for the past three decades. Some of it can be blamed on crooked mortgage brokers, lenders, and realtors, but a lot of it has to do with homeowners themselves. I understand the principle of a ARM. It has been around since the 1970's or perhaps earlier. But the problem is se have continuously outspent ourselves more than what we we earn.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre
Originally posted by Sprint_girl07: Is there anywhere in the world where a woman can have several husbands legally? lol
WONDERFUL!! So Instead Of Taking Everything From one man, they can take everything from 3 men! HOLY SHMOKES!!!! what else could someone want???? the whole world in their hands??? LITERALLY!!!
What took you so long Hudson? I was expecting something more aggressive than this. Your getting soft in your old age (lol).
Actually I don't watch much TV at all. Barely the radio at times. AM at that.
I don't agree with the over valued aspect. If you look at it from the perspective of a $ v $. A house cost 150k in Texas versus the same house in California at 600k then it could be said. But that is not taking into account all the other factors.
In Texas you are encouraged to build. California you are not. In Texas a building permit is cheap. In California it is often the most expensive part of the bill. The amount of bureaucracy with permits, easements, disclosures, surveys, environmental impact studies and so forth makes it expensive before board one is erected. There is even a disclosure to state you don't believe your house is haunted. From the tedious to the ridiculous.
Then it becomes a simple issue of supply and demand. A lot of people and not too many houses in CA. Only the wealthy or wanna seem wealthy can afford it.
The realtor's part in this is actually small. Typically they want people to sell somewhat cheap. Reason being a quick sale equals a quick commission. The lenders are the biggest problem. They know better. They know the ARM will climb and the person won't be able to afford the payments. I fault them for not disclosing enough and educating the buyer on the reality of their decision. They should be required to show the buyer what the payments could be based on past years rate indexes.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
Posts: 5805 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007
Originally posted by Sprint_girl07: Is there anywhere in the world where a woman can have several husbands legally? lol
What you are talking about is Polyandry. It has occured in Mongolia, Tibet, Shr Lanka, and Nepal, that I know of. Of course, it also happened a long time ago.
Interesting Hudson, never knew it actually existed the other way around.
Who would want several husbands anyway, hard enough to cope with one lol Don't want several pairs of socks in corner of sofa now do I? lmao
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- God Bless America - God Bless Immigrants - God Bless Poor Misguided Souls Too Mr S.U.
Speed, why not the husband retaining title so he can insure the eldest son/daughter gets it? When the women remarries the new guy will not respect the x-husband's wishes. No obligation to. Actually he will have claim to the property by virtue of community property, improvement, and commingling of funds. With that, if he has any kids they will have a stronger claim against it than the X.
The situation you described couldn't happen, not here. A bank would not carry the loan based on a divorce settlement. They are under no obligation to honor it or separate the two and title could not pass without a bargained for exchange. Not to say it can't be written in the divorce decree and the judge sign off on it. But in the real world it would have very little force and affect. Much like those silly agreements as to who is going to pay off the joint credit cards. Visa/Master card doesn't care what you agreed to. What matters is the contracts originally signed. If one defaults they go after the other. Divorce agreement matters not.
Another item to consider is future behavior. You can't mandate someone's future acts in a divorce agreement. In other words you can't have the x-wife promise not to remarry to prevent another guy from gaining an equitable share in it. Or have her agree not to have kids with someone else. And you can not mandate a prenuptial that performs the same affects either. The idea of divorce is a complete parting of the ways.
Vote Republican and this country will still be worth sneaking into.
Wow you even can assume the exwife future hubby's behavior.
lol, your a low class kind of guy Davdah!
You're the type who fights from nails, to pots and pans!! You're cheap!
You're yapping is really annoying!
This message has been edited. Last edited by: speed_025,
Speed, I think your getting off track with what I was explaining. Or maybe we both were going in different directions.
It isn't a matter of what a guy can afford. I was just pointing out that you can't count on an x-wife to continue a set of plans especially when she gets a new husband. It becomes his family, his rules.
It is correct to have some sterotypes. The one I had in mind is this. That a women, when married, wants to have a complete life with whom she is married to. That life would also be free of any restrictions from the past. The new husband would want the same. And by all rights they should have it. Would you marry a women who had a situation where she had to maintain a house for some other guy? You had no right to say lets move to the other side of town. It wouldn't be fair to anyone to create a family dynamic like that.
I shouldn't sound like anything. You can't hear me, can you? (lol)..
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
Posts: 5805 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007
Speed, I think your getting off track with what I was explaining. Or maybe we both were going in different directions.
It isn't a matter of what a guy can afford. I was just pointing out that you can't count on an x-wife to continue a set of plans especially when she gets a new husband. It becomes his family, his rules.
lol you're very funny davdah! Read back ... See how simple is my statement.
You don't need 365 wives in order to date as many women per year. But you need great stamina and extraordinary prowessess of spirit and body for that. I would settle with 52 a year (one week with each, since it takes time to get acquianted and all that, and just enough to part without boring one another).
Add to del.icio.us
WHY????? 
Hers or His