Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Senior Member
|
In many cases it makes sense to have a written agreement ("just in case").
There are also cases where written agreement could ruin the fundamental core of relationship based on mutual recognition of certain code of ethics that is not alterable, under no conditions.
I once encountered a South Korean man, a mortgage specialist with large firm in NY past , a real estate owner/broker in present.
He claimed that in S.K. the best partnerships are sealed with handshake and if it requires more than that then it's not a trustworthy partnership and thus should be avoided by all means.
Of course no rule is universal, what is good in certain circumstances can never be good in other.
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by CKT510:
What's the big deal about a prenupt, Hudson??? If two people love each other, shouldn't one understand the concerns about the other who may have just worked 20-30 years of their life and wants to ensure where the money should go should there be a divorce??? You are living in a dream world, not in 2007. If someone just worked their a** off for years and years and is concerned about the future of his estate, I WOULD certainly take the pressure off of him/her and sign a prenupt. Again, what's the big deal????
Well, we can take the reverse. Each spouse will understand the concerns, but will do everything and anything to ease those concerns. This would include that no doubt exists when they take their vows and both know that marriage is the right choice. This involves in how you define love. Is it eros, philos, or agape. In this example, both have agape love for each other and really don't care what the future holds. Now, I know you will say that is foolish or unwise, but it can be wise if they know exactly what they want and what they understand about each other knowing without a doubt or without hesitation how each will react. This is rare in today's world, but it happens. The one who lives in fantasy is you. I know and understand the reasons for a prenuptial. There are legitimate reasons, but as I said, it is not for everybody or anybody. In some cases, it may even be required. I have experienced, both professionally and personally, both good and bad on prenuptials. I have experienced some relationships disappear at the very mention of the word and some where it is not a hinderance. It is not because of money or power, but prenuptial have a strong connotation for lack of trust. That lack of trust makes the marriage difficult, sometimes extremely difficult, where it will eventually end in failure.
"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
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by davdah:
I do understand about family money. You would think having a lot would make things easier. Sometimes it doesn't. Wives, kids, relatives can and do adopt an attitude of entitlement. Even if you want to do what is in the best interest of your family rare is it that everyone is happy.
Well, I gave family money as an example of usurping some local estate or probate law. However, in one experience of mine, there was a couple that had a prenupt. It was because both owned businesses that competed against each other. However, the other shareholders in that business, basically, required that a prenupt be signed. From what I understand, the prenupt only included the business assests of each other and how each of them will conduct their business and not intrude personally or professionally on their prospectives business interests. All other property was left out. The prenupt satisfied the requirements of the other shareholders and was a better legal contract than a formal business contract of non competing. quote: I don't really agree with appeasing the in-laws. Im of the mind that I am the way I am. I expect to be respected the way I am. I will not jump through any hoops to impress anyone. If in Rome do as the Romans. If I were there I would honor the traditions and so forth they have. By the same token since its here, the the social rules we have prevail. So, when I go there I will take my shoes off when I walk in their house. But, if they come here they better leave them on. I don't like smelling peoples stinky feet. (lol).[/QUOTE[
Well, it will depend on your girlfriend's culture. Sometimes it is required before a marriage takes place, no matter how old she is. Sometimes it is more personal. But you will have to deal with it one way or another. It may not involve money or gifts, but trust and cooperation. And the culture is a part of who and what she is. You must accept that, Davdah.
[QUOTE]Speaking of feet. As small as her feet are, yes I have tried to put her shoes on. Figuratively of course.
Seriously though, looking from her side, she is completely dependent and vulnerable. Not a comfortable position to be in unless you trust the other. It hasn't come up yet but I think the idea of feeling like your owing to the other has crossed her mind. Being that she can't contribute at the moment, it bothers her.
I know you believe a prenupt is the way to go, and I have given you some alternatives that may meet your requirements; however, if you must have a prenupt, write it for the both of you, not just you. This may help the ease which you have to explain the financial risk versus the display of mistrust. quote: As for taxes. If filed seperatly I would probably have all the write offs. Since all the assets, buildings etc. are free and clear of mortgages it just leaves depreciation, taxes, and maintenance. Im not sure if it would be necessary to file seperatly. Have to talk to an accountant about that.
Generally speaking, it will be required, especially in community property states. I have not known any circumstance which a prenupt existed and the couple filed jointly. But my experience in this is limited. quote: On a non emotional level it makes perfect sense what CKT510 is saying. Which is what I try to do. Step back and leave the feelings aside and see the praticalities. And ask the 10 mil question, What if? Im probably going to do it anyway. If for nothing else but to insure my kids get what I worked for them to have. Im just not the gambling type. Ive been to Vegas several times over the last couple years and they don't make a dime off of me. I learned the lesson years ago. Only costed me $30.00 worth of nickels. After I lost it I walked towards the elevators. I noticed some people just sitting there staring at the slot machines in absolute disbelief. You could tell what they were thinking. They couldn't believe they lost it all. I don't want to have that look.
Well sure if you are marrying your business, a house, or a robot, but it does not make sense when you are marrying a woman. And since you are marrying someone who is a living being that has emotions, you cannot exclude those emotions either, you and her. For you, it is obvious. You have been hurt, you have fear of being hurt again, you have fear of what might happen if she leaves one day after the marriage, or one year, one decade, and you have fear of yourself. And because of this fear, you deem that a prenupt can ease that fear. I will tell you it will not. I am not saying that a prenupt is not right for you, just saying that it will not alleviate your fears. Other activities will help you with that. As for the "what ifs." She can come back and state I will marry you but will not sign a prenupt. Or she might say I will leave. What will your reaction be? (this is a rhetorical question) Or we can look at your "what ifs." What if your business fails while she becomes successful? Will the prenupt become a hindrance or a blessing? What if you commit adultery? What if you control her despite what you have said on this forum? What if you really don't love her and use the prenupt as a control mechanism? Finally, we are all gamblers, in one way or another. Granted, like you, I don't do Vegas, or Macao, for that matter. However you do gamble on a daily basis. The decisions you make on your business is always a gamble. One bad business decision or deal can break you. One bad employee can cost you dearly. And one bad event or series of events can crush you. And that is why we have insurance, but that was not the point. The point is you gambe even though you don't recognize it. Food for thought. quote: Hudson, you made a comment about a real man not asking for a prenupt if he wasn't afraid of his future. I would agree if I had some reasonable control over that future. If it were me alone I had to worry about, I wouldn't give it a second thought. No one can accurately predict what another person will do in the next 5 minutes. Thats the problem.
Do not confuse control of your future and having no fear. Having no fear means acceptance on who, what, and to what extent you life has been, is, and will be. It does not mean one acts foolishly, but one who does not fear death at any time, yet does not seek death either. You control your future by the actions to take today and tomorrow while learning/comprehending your past experiences. However, I disagree to some extent no one can predict what a person does. If you have lived with your girlfriend for some time, you know some of the idiosyncrasies on how she thinks, how she acts, how she will react, etc. You may not predict it with accuracy, but you do have a premonition if you have been observant, that is.
"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
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
Life itself is a daily gamble. Most of what we do is at assumed risk. We get up and maybe we won't break our neck in the shower. That actually brought up another issue. She wants me to stop flying. Says its too dangerous. Ok, I did have one near miss a while back but its still safer than driving. There are a lot of what ifs to consider. One she did bring up is what about our children? Something else to chew on. Since I want to insure the existing ones get theirs, what guarantee is there to future children? She is actually ok with the idea so long as it only involves what existed before and doesn't impede on benefits to future children. I can live with that. One point you brought up about using it as a control mechanism. I wouldn't do it but she told me about some people she knew back in Colorado that were in that spot. The GC etc was used as leverage against the person. That or worse, they became illegal and were turned into slaves. I would imagine an immigrant would have that worry. Maybe I can put a clause in there to guarantee I will follow through on the process. It makes me wonder about some of the people on this site and a couple others. I would guess in a lot of cases the immigrants were made to feel they were indebted to the sponsor while in process. Makes perfect sense they would bail out at the first opportunity. Something to be careful about. Its nice to be helpful but destructive to remind the person of it.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
|
| |
| Posts: 5738 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007 | |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by davdah:
Life itself is a daily gamble. Most of what we do is at assumed risk. We get up and maybe we won't break our neck in the shower. That actually brought up another issue. She wants me to stop flying. Says its too dangerous. Ok, I did have one near miss a while back but its still safer than driving.
Yes, and a prenuptial can reduce some or most of the risk, or the prenuptial can create more risk. This depends on how she preceives the prenuptial either as a consequence or hinderance in the relationship. quote: There are a lot of what ifs to consider. One she did bring up is what about our children?
Something else to chew on. Since I want to insure the existing ones get theirs, what guarantee is there to future children? She is actually ok with the idea so long as it only involves what existed before and doesn't impede on benefits to future children. I can live with that.
This has to do more with estate planning than a prenuptial, Davdah. Keep the two separate. quote: One point you brought up about using it as a control mechanism. I wouldn't do it but she told me about some people she knew back in Colorado that were in that spot. The GC etc was used as leverage against the person. That or worse, they became illegal and were turned into slaves. I would imagine an immigrant would have that worry. Maybe I can put a clause in there to guarantee I will follow through on the process.
You are on the right track, but you will need to go a little further. Not only a clause about her immigration status, but about her working, traveling, and sharing things together. Place the consequences of divorce equally on you and her. Also include that additional property you want to share with her and include your main home. These are ways to alleviate the suspicion that a prenuptial can create. Food for thought. quote: It makes me wonder about some of the people on this site and a couple others. I would guess in a lot of cases the immigrants were made to feel they were indebted to the sponsor while in process. Makes perfect sense they would bail out at the first opportunity. Something to be careful about. Its nice to be helpful but destructive to remind the person of it.
I would generally agree with the assessment, but I also have reservations about it as well.
"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
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
The issue of what future kids will have versus present had more to do with disparities of financial privilege. If the first 4 can get college without begging for scholarships will any future children be potentially denied this if current longterm assets are set aside. A valid point that will need to be ironed out. The point of the main home would already be a problem. I already own it free and clear. Would be kind of hard to include it since nothing is owed aside from taxes and paying the gardener (he is legal, I checked). The real problem with the consequences as in a lot of marriages the wife has little in the way of initial assets to place at risk. Risk/reward will be a tough balancing act. My last comment about indebtedness. I guess it could swing either way but I would be inclined to believe its more the sponsors fault when that happens. It would take an oscar class actress to pull off faking love for years at a time. But just about anyone who fits the category of 'If you ..... your probably a red neck' can do the other.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
|
| |
| Posts: 5738 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007 | |
|
Power Member
|
Davdah - do you truly love her? Not sure after all the banter I've read here. I am a USC married to a USC - I was more financially stable when we entered our marriage than he was. Never once did I think of a prenupt. To me, a prenupt is saying "divorce is inevitable". If my husband and I divorced today, I'd be out of alot of money, but he put up with me for 22 years, so why shouldn't he get a portion? I guess I'm too 'old school' to understand all of this. And, I don't blame your girlfriend for being mad over your suggestion of a prenupt. If you don't trust her, don't marry her - plain and simple!
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
I understand your concern. In the past I wouldn't have considered it either, that is, until lightning strikes. It would be one thing if two people divorce because they just don't get along. They both contributed in good faith to the marriage to make it what it is financially. For that I could see equal division. But, what if one person did all and the other got drunk and philandered. Leaning on 'the law says I get half' is that fair? Morally reprehensible but legal. It isn't the current emotional status that concerns me. Its what may come around the bend. For anyone who hasn't been there its a difficult understanding. But picture it if you will. Since you are better off. If you were the only producer and he was the drunk. He left you for a drinking buddy and took all they could. No shame or guilt, just greed for all your work, patience, etc.. Makes you angry to even picture it doesn't it? More than likely I will put a time limit on it. In a couple years it should be well established which way things will go. I'll take from the immigration play book. Kind of like a conditional GC. Actually she isn't too opposed to it. Even though she hasn't been married before she saw some of what happened and understands my cautionary position.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
|
| |
| Posts: 5738 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007 | |
|
Power Member
|
It seems to me, that you have no trust in the woman you want to marry....
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
Jake01 its not so much a matter of trust as it is how screwy the laws are. If your a guy who has a lot and you get married to someone who has next to nothing. Is it fair they are entitled to 1/2 your lifes work regardless the reason for the divorce. What we make and build together should be shared. What a person had before should be there's to take with them if there is a divorce. Thats the premise of my thinking. Since Ive been married a few times I know divorce is always a real possibility. If this is your first time then I hope for you the best. Divorce is an ugly act that brings out the worst in people. Much of if at the coaching of the worst verman that slithered out of a university, lawyers. If you live in a community property state as California and Texas are and you have liquid assets greater than a mil then you should look at it. If not, then it probably is waste of time.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
|
| |
| Posts: 5738 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007 | |
|
Power Member
|
Hi Davdah, I am sorry if I offended you, and I have been Married b4, I was married to my ex for nearly 20 years, until he ran off with a (you are not going to beleive this) a Mexican!! he left me with Credit card bills, car loan, because I had to be his guarantor as he was made bankcrupt previously. I more or less had to sell my soul to settle HIS unpaid bills. anyway I am pass that, my new Husband and I have made a fresh new start, but all I am trying to say, is if you really love a woman/man, you trust them, you are honest and open with them, and you love them. and vice versa...
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
by the way...... I do agree, there should be a law that what you have before a marraige, should belong to you 100%, only what is accummilated during the marraige should be split.
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
I didn't take any offense to what you said. No big deal. Yup, the law should read that way. To a certain extent it does but how you get burned is usually through the process of commingling of assets. Example, in most of cases a house is never really paid off. There is always taxes and upkeep. If the spouse helps to pay that directly or indirectly they now own their half.
You voted democrat. This country is not worth sneaking into any more.
|
| |
| Posts: 5738 | Location: San Antonio TX | Registered: 06-08-2007 | |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by davdah:
The issue of what future kids will have versus present had more to do with disparities of financial privilege. If the first 4 can get college without begging for scholarships will any future children be potentially denied this if current longterm assets are set aside. A valid point that will need to be ironed out.
The point of the main home would already be a problem. I already own it free and clear. Would be kind of hard to include it since nothing is owed aside from taxes and paying the gardener (he is legal, I checked). The real problem with the consequences as in a lot of marriages the wife has little in the way of initial assets to place at risk. Risk/reward will be a tough balancing act.
My last comment about indebtedness. I guess it could swing either way but I would be inclined to believe its more the sponsors fault when that happens. It would take an oscar class actress to pull off faking love for years at a time. But just about anyone who fits the category of 'If you ..... your probably a red neck' can do the other.
1. You can;t predict everyything. You could have children who don't want to go to college, get married by the time they are 16, etc. What it means, though, is if you start a 529 plan, for instance, for one child in a previous relationship, you better well start one for your child with your current GF too. What it is going to boil down is whether you will treat the children with your current GF the same as with your previous relationships or not. This has evertything to do with compromise, not priorities. 2. The point about the main home has to do with US instead of Me! If you write a prenuptial that is more about me and not willing to compromise something of value, then she will know whet your true intentions are, despite the smoke and mirrors. And BTW, she has already compromised herself greatly, if it does not work out. Again, this is not a business partnership you are writing, Davdah. This is a document that will split any property in case of divorce. She is more than willing to compromise, but she is also not a **** fool. So don't take her for one. The question is are you willing ro compromise? If the answer is no, then you should not get married to her or anyone else. Your previous divorces are proof enough that some of the blame falls on you. 3. Depending on where she is from will depend on how indebtedness is viewed. However, that was not the point. The point was if the situation was reversed and she was proposing the same things you are, will you sign the prenuptial. If the answer is no, then the prenuptial will be viewed as a controlling, uncompromising document where duress is involved. If the answer is yes, then either you are wise or a fool depending on how the relationship goes. Again, I would look at other options like a postnupt or a revocable trust. With the situation you are in where one as all the assets and the other is dependent on you, you will have to make some concessions. Family home is the most logical asset. She is already living there under your roof, but she wants it to be our roof. Business assets are something easily divided into separate property under the prenupt, particularly if she decides to go into business herself. But personal use property, is not so easily divided. This is where the compromise comes in. You can compromise some personal use property, but not all. You can make it that the longer the marriage, the more community property will come in, both current and future. I also get the distinct impression that you do not want any more property that can be considered both of yours. This is a bad idea where you have come in. You cannot build a lasting relationship with her under that premise. And it goes to a control issue in the marriage, where it will doom to fail because of you, not her.
"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
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by Jake01:
It seems to me, that you have no trust in the woman you want to marry....
I think it has to do with more of his insecurities tahn the trust, or lack thereof, with her.
"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
|
| |
|
Power Member
|
quote: Originally posted by davdah:
ProudUSC, I didn't think we were bantering. Just calmly, cooly ,discussing a topic. No jumping up and down or screaming. I wasn't, was anyone else?
The 529 plan may be a good idea. I want all the kids (current and possible future) to be on an equal plane. Some will go to school, some won't. I've alreay seen it. Mine rang
| |
Add to del.icio.us