Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

How to explain ERE, arranging family matters
2Birds1Stone
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:20 am
Location: Earth

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by 2Birds1Stone » Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:04 pm

Ego wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:13 pm
Are you sure about that?
This is America, so anything can be an exception, but generally in NY State pre-marital assets are not included in the equitable division of marital property. *buyer beware*
unemployable wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:49 pm
It's incorrect. Ask Jeff Bezos.
I guess it depends on where you live, get married, and ultimately get divorced. This is one of those issues that varies wildly based on state, circumstance, and which side of the bed the judge woke up on.

bigato
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by bigato » Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:43 pm

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.

User avatar
Dream of Freedom
Posts: 416
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 » Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:57 pm

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: 5202
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:44 am

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: 24
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:51 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by LookingInward » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:58 am

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: 4301
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Ego » Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:24 pm

@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: 560
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Bankai » Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:36 pm

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.

bigato
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by bigato » Sun Sep 15, 2019 2:17 pm

Yeah, it seems like just poor risk management to me. Off course there's a selection bias, because we will only hear the ones who were successful defending the "all in" attitude. It's a perfect strategy until it isn't. Having an exit plan is just being humble and admitting that one can't know everything about oneself, the other, and the world to predict the future with 100% accuracy. I see it as having insurance, and it only makes me certain that the other is with me because they really want to, not because they have no other option and not because divorcing would be financially too painful.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Ego » Sun Sep 15, 2019 2:26 pm

@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: 560
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Bankai » Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:04 pm

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: 2325
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason » Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:29 pm

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: 198
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by ZAFCorrection » Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:59 pm

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: 24
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:51 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by LookingInward » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:58 am

@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: 95
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by anesde » Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:16 am

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: 2325
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason » Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:58 am

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.

bigato
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by bigato » 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.

1. How is commiting half of your money a "necessary sacrifice" or how does it help at all in the relationship? Why should it be a financial value involved? Isn't it just much simpler and wiser to remove the threat to your net worth out of the equation? Specially given that money is the number one reason of marital disagreements. It also work both ways, it is beneficial even when you are the one with the smaller wages and net worth. Why add financial pain to the equation in the case something like bad happens? Is it a "burning the ships" thing, like you make sure it will be so painful to divorce that you never divorce and suffer through the pain of staying together instead?


2. I understand that you should make sure you are sure you want to marry. But does someone assume that they are infallible in this judgment? How sure one can be? Is living together for a year enough to be sure? One decade? Is it even possible to be completely sure? How do you explain people who change their minds after two decades?

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by fiby41 » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:32 pm

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: 2325
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Jason » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:19 pm

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: 272
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:51 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by Toska2 » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:03 pm

Move to a richer location and marry up.

bigato
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: Mitigating the risk of losing 50% in divorce

Post by bigato » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:21 pm

Jason: nah, I don't think so. I'm 38 now and I survived one marriage. I don't even think I want another, let alone one that can only work if backed up by half my net worth.
Toska2: that's not the point, I could get richer, they could get poor, it doesn't matter. It's in the purpose of everyone's safety and peace of mind.

Post Reply