Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

How to explain ERE, arranging family matters
User avatar
Dream of Freedom
Posts: 521
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Nebraska, US

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Dream of Freedom »

If you are interested in listening to someone who has been through the prenup process before you make a decision there is a interview you can listen to:
https://podcastnotes.org/2019/05/22/sethi-4/
Relevant part starts at 1:02:20

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6152
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am
Location: Clinton River Watershed

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

bigato wrote:Around here in Brazil, the law is such that you don't even need to live in the same house to be considered a couple, legally married for all purposes. It's really complicated, almost like marrying with a prenup is a defensive and necessary move if your relationship starts to last a bit more.
It's the opposite in the U.S. since the big palimony cases of the last century set precedent. This makes for some interesting tax situations, because your live-in is always a separate household and never your de facto employee. So, any funds/goods transferred are tax free for recipient, because either gift or "ghost" status.

@fiby41:

Unless you hire a surrogate and choose to solo-father, having children is going to be the risk, not marriage. What I see as the primary problem for the divorced Dads I have dated and several of the members of this forum is their own internal strife in deciding what constitutes providing a reasonable upbringing for their kids within their class structure. So, for instance, one of my friends has to pay maximum child support due to high income, but that doesn't mean that his ex doesn't call him up once a week to ask him to chip in or outright pay for summer soccer camp, orthodontics, or next size up shoes. My BIL, who was never married to mother of his teenage child being raised in NYC, voluntarily pays more than courts would demand because that's what it costs to raise kid in the city. Married or not, you really have to be on the same page/team with your partner if you are going to fight against the growing stream of "have" and "have not" children in modern day 2- tier class system America.

LookingInward
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:51 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by LookingInward »

To @Seppia and others who haves this view of "all or nothing" with regards to marriage: what exactly do you mean by this (Specially when it comes to finances)? To me it sounds like a poor plan, but I want to know more.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4809
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Ego »

@lookinginward, two committed people can nurture a relationship into something that they each value far more than anything else. More than money or power or freedom or status or autonomy.

For this to work they must both be absolutely committed. All in.

If you've found a good, kind, decent human being to partner with then why wouldn't you go all in?

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Bankai »

Because people change? I think it's a mistake to assume that you can somehow 'lock in' the wonderful thing you have going (the honeymoon period of relationship) by getting married.

Consider that probably most if not all people who get married think at that point that they marry an amazing person. But what happens later? Half get divorced. Half of the other half live in misery because they have no guts to leave. Half of the other quarter have an OK/average relationship. That leaves what, 12.5% of good to great relationships? 1 in 8 odds don't strike me as particularly great to put half of my money on.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4809
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Ego »

@Bankai, I'm not sure I agree with the 12.5% but let's go with it. To be part of a 12.5% relationship takes work and sacrifice. If you are not sure you've found someone willing to put in the work and make the sacrifices necessary - or if you are not willing yourself - then don't get married. Lots of people get married for the wrong reasons. Some multiple times.

Odds are for games of chance. Having now been in a great relationship for more than half my life I can say with certainty that if you are not certain that you can trust your prospective spouse with all you money and your life as well, then don't get married.

The people who have the 12.5% relationships don't believe they had a 12.5% chance of achieving a 12.5% relationship.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Bankai »

Of course they don't - it's survivalship bias in action! Similarly consider all these successful entrepreneurs who tell you that you need to put in hard work and sacrifice a lot to achieve your dreams. What about all those who do just that and fail anyway. Also, it's unfair towards all the divorced people as it assumes that they didn't really try hard enough.

Jason
Posts: 2814
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason »

Bankai wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:04 pm
Also, it's unfair towards all the divorced people as it assumes that they didn't really try hard enough.
They could hand out marital participation trophies instead of divorce certificates.

ZAFCorrection
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by ZAFCorrection »

The odd thing about this question, as has been implicitly referred to already, is the somewhat fatalistic assumption that a marriage is going to shake out in basically the same way as it does for the average (i.e. people who YOLO their way through everything). Ya, find a compatible spouse. But you also got to figure out how to play nice for the next n decades. That surely can be optimized to some extent, even if there is this factor of an animate object (the actual spouse) you have to deal with.

LookingInward
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:51 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by LookingInward »

@ZAFCorrection I'm quite positive no one here is assuming any one outcome. What some people are pointing out, myself included, is that there are highly material negative possible outcomes and that one should think about them.

When I hear people say "you just have to go all in" it seems to me quite dogmatic. But again, I may be wrong so I like to hear other people's thoughts =)

anesde
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by anesde »

A lot of people here are focusing on the average output - the 50% divorce (or 87.5% of non-happy marriages per Bankai).

I think what Ego/JP/Seppia are saying is you can’t have an average input and expect an exceptional output. Rather, you need an exceptional input to get that.

Have you found someone that you can trust with your money and life? Have you discussed the situations (better yet experienced them) where you’re in a bad mood, stressed, shocked, angry, upset, etc and how this affects you jointly? These seem like basic things but many people don’t do them, or they aren’t honest about them. Many unsuccessful business owners work many hours but focus on the wrong things. It’s really no different here.

The bigger question for me is why get married if you aren’t jointly prepared to have an exceptional input? I don’t disagree that many people fall in and out of love, nor that people change over time and choose to get divorced. But then why get married in the first place?

A commitment to each other needs to bridge all of that shit, together. It’s not easy. Just don’t do it if you both aren’t prepared for it.

Jason
Posts: 2814
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason »

I figure that the average individual can marry approx. 50,000 different people. Or maybe I read that. Or maybe someone told me that. Whatever the case is, the basic premise is that there is no such thing as THE one. There is simply the one to whom you say I do. This takes the pressure off the individual you are marrying. Who here wants to be THE one? That is just too high a standard. Marriage is a pledge to a certain type of relationship, not simply to an individual. It's an agreement between two individuals that this is the type of relationship they want to be in so it's as much in believing in an idea of how a relationship should operate and be constructed as it is an another individual. It allows for change i.e. in sickness and in health. It doesn't say as "long as you remain hot, do the dishes and blow me every morning." That's where the all in comes in - to the pledge not the person. The way to mitigate the risk of losing 50% is don't make the pledge.

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 1303
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am
Location: India

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by fiby41 »

Jason wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:58 am
Whatever the case is, the basic premise is that there is no such thing as THE one.
There is no ONE. This is the 'soulmate' myth. There are good Ones and there are bad Ones, but there is no ONE.
~Rollo Tomassi
anesde wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:16 am
But then why get married in the first place?
I am in the camp that the only legitimate reason for marriage is to have children. Certainly there's the religious side to it but it is more about pragmatism.

I wanted marriage to reduce costs.
Cohabitation has its benefits but nothing that getting a roommate won't offer. As for having a roommate you can sleep with, everyone knows the frequency and intensity drops after moving in.
This argument would have held water if everything was 50-50 but as it stands one gender is responsible for 85% of the consumer spending.

Most courts consider it marriage anyway if there is a child in the mix so might as well have the wedding. Birth out of wedlock is the next best thing, but I'd wager it's nice for the child to have both parents around for emotional stability even if one parent could financially upbring it.

Jason
Posts: 2814
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason »

bigato wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:12 pm
I understand the "you should commit" idea, but here's the two points of friction for me regarding the "all in" approach the way it is being described above.
When you get down on one knee and "Mrs. Future Bigato, I love you nearly as much as my puncture resistant bicycle tires and I want to spend the rest of my life with you but I do not want to co-mingle our finances and please understand that in twenty years I may no longer feel this way" you will probably find that your two point of frictions to be moot.

Toska2
Posts: 320
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:51 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Toska2 »

Move to a richer location and marry up.

Jason
Posts: 2814
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason »

bigato wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:21 pm
I'm 38 now and I survived one marriage.
Now things make sense.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6152
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am
Location: Clinton River Watershed

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Another factor to take into the statistical analysis is that it is very much not the case that every partner you might choose will take 50% upon break-up. I didn't even chase my ex down for child support, and I threw the money my "ex" had left me in his will into the wind when I left him. The worst cases I know of in terms of wealthier partner getting hit hard usually involved something incredibly stupid like a 41 year old marrying a 21 year old and then she is terrified dealing with life on her own 20 years down the road when they are divorcing. Maybe the safest choice would be a woman who really values autonomy, but is just barely willing to give it up to be with you. For instance, if a woman ever says something to you like "You are a f*cking idiot. I would rather live in a tent in a war zone than put up with your bullsh*t for one more minute." and then starts packing, that woman would be a keeper if you are primarily concerned with mitigating financial loss upon break-up. Of course, then you will still have to deal with the fall-out and continuing life expense of your inherent f*cking idiocy, but that's a different problem.

iopsi
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:30 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by iopsi »

Do not marry. Risk drops to 0.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Bankai »

@7: I heard respect is a good thing to have in a relationship.

Jason
Posts: 2814
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 6:19 am
For instance, if a woman ever says something to you like "You are a f*cking idiot.
If? I'd sooner spend time mitigating the risk of the sun coming up.

Post Reply