|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:39 pm
Sir_Cathl_Peabody You might try clicking on "Listen Live" at http://www.fmtalki.com/ between 3pm and 8pm Monday through Friday. This show is a good offers a good guideline to get your testicles reattached. They even have a segment on Thursdays from 5pm to 6pm that specifically targets people like you to give advice towards. You can listen to 97.1FM on the radio for this same show if you live in Los Angeles or Orange Counties. Exhibit A why Nathan will probably never get married.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:49 pm
Soleq Exhibit A why Nathan will probably never get married. What benifit(s) can you get if you are married, that you cannot get if you are not married?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:51 pm
Tax benefits and medical benefits are the two major ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:57 pm
Soleq Tax benefits and medical benefits are the two major ones. You can get tax benifits and medical benfits if you are not married. Additionally, the things you mention are meant to be financial incentives, but if you look at marriage as a whole, it is essentially a coin flip for you to loose half of all your assests. (In California, it's even worse than a coin flip at 60 something percent divorce rate.) Whatever gains you make pale in comparison to what you could loose. Your cost of living also goes up because you're now responsible to your wife and future kids. Marriage is actually a financial liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 5:13 pm
Being able to file taxes as husband and wife is meant to be an incentive; receiving my wife's level of health care is a benefit.
Marriage is only a coin flip if there are no variables in determining if a specific marriage will succeed or fail. I would say that most marriages are pre-determined to fail. Some will surely "succeed" because of religious beliefs, and others do fall into that 50/50 category. Therefore, it's somewhat of a falacy to claim that all marriages are a simple coinflip.
Of course marriages are fiancial liabilities. People who enter marriage thinking life will be great, and that there's not a possibilty of losing money is a moron. But cars are financial liabilities. Houses are financial liabilities. Hell, even friends are financial liabilities. I spent a buttload on my college roommate because he didn't own s**t (and he ate all my food). Most things in life can bite you in the a**.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 5:21 pm
Soleq Being able to file taxes as husband and wife is meant to be an incentive; receiving my wife's level of health care is a benefit. You misunderstood my question. Yes, your wifes plan may benifit you specifically in the here and now, but you could get a good insurance policy without being married if you cared enough to do so. Soleq Marriage is only a coin flip if there are no variables in determining if a specific marriage will succeed or fail. I would say that most marriages are pre-determined to fail. Some will surely "succeed" because of religious beliefs, and others do fall into that 50/50 category. Therefore, it's somewhat of a falacy to claim that all marriages are a simple coinflip. Billions of people have said "I do" and assumed they were entering into this contract for the rest of their life, but they ended up terminating their agreements anyway. Religious people are even a part of this group. Assuming you have the right formula for success just seems arrogant. Soleq Of course marriages are fiancial liabilities. People who enter marriage thinking life will be great, and that there's not a possibilty of losing money is a moron. But cars are financial liabilities. Houses are financial liabilities. Hell, even friends are financial liabilities. I spent a buttload on my college roommate because he didn't own s**t (and he ate all my food). Most things in life can bite you in the a**. The point I was making was that you said the benifits to marriage were financial. I was talking about how this is not a right way of looking at it. I don't dislike you or anything. I'm in your corner. It is my sincere hope that it works out for you, and if it doesn't, that you have a prenup. Please tell me you have a prenup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:08 pm
Well I agree with each of your points. Especially the arrogance.
In any case, as it stands right now, I would lose nothing if I got divorced. The only thing that could cause me to lose money is legal fees. Alimony only hurts those who make a substantial difference more than their spouse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:33 pm
Soleq Well I agree with each of your points. Especially the arrogance. In any case, as it stands right now, I would lose nothing if I got divorced. The only thing that could cause me to lose money is legal fees. Alimony only hurts those who make a substantial difference more than their spouse. I can understand how the business end of a marriage tends to be classified as "unromantic" and therefore people deem it unnecessary. Since marriage is supposed to be about romance and all... I'm more of the exacting type. The fact remains it is still a business partnership. What if you win the lottery, hit big in Vegas or inherit money from a relative? This stuff may not calculate into your plan, but it can happen. It is also curious to me how in all other business partnerships, each member will work out a way to protect each other's assests as a matter of procedure, but this is rarely done with marriage partnerships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:52 pm
Good analogy. I think I will incorporate my marriage to a Class-S corporation as to further enhance my tax benefits. That way if the marriage is on the virge of failing, I can simply fire my wife and be legally protected from lawsuits (I would be protected, the marriage corporation would take the brunt of it). I could also file under a different chapter of bankruptcy if needbe as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:58 pm
Soleq Good analogy. I think I will incorporate my marriage to a Class-S corporation as to further enhance my tax benefits. That way if the marriage is on the virge of failing, I can simply fire my wife and be legally protected from lawsuits (I would be protected, the marriage corporation would take the brunt of it). I could also file under a different chapter of bankruptcy if needbe as well. Corporations and partnerships are very different things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:41 am
This is true, but you can incorporate any business venture. Partnerships are simply proprietorships with more than one person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:45 am
Wow, these last few posts really made me laugh. domokun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:52 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:22 pm
Soleq This is true, but you can incorporate any business venture. Partnerships are simply proprietorships with more than one person. When I say business partnership I'm using the term in a general sense. This particular partnership is just a sharing of assets, not a business venture. I think my criticism is still justified. Why are legal protections are exercised in most other legal partnerships, but not marriage? If you want my opinion, it has to do with a variety of factors including the government viewing it as a way to subsidize welfare, and culturally females feel a sense of entitlement along with males who feel a sense of obligation. I feel people like you have been culturally affected to their own detriment. That does not excuse personal responsibility though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:28 pm
Sir_Cathl_Peabody Soleq This is true, but you can incorporate any business venture. Partnerships are simply proprietorships with more than one person. When I say business partnership I'm using the term in a general sense. This particular partnership is just a sharing of assets, not a business venture. I think my criticism is still justified. Why are legal protections are exercised in most other legal partnerships, but not marriage? If you want my opinion, it has to do with a variety of factors including the government viewing it as a way to subsidize welfare, and culturally females feel a sense of entitlement along with males who feel a sense of obligation. I feel people like you have been culturally affected to their own detriment. That does not excuse personal responsibility though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
