You haven't paid much attention in the past when this subject has been
discussed...

Phil#3 wrote:

"Indyguy1" wrote in message
...
Phil#3 wrote:

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
You have correctly summarized the situation for many men, Phil.

Almost the only benefit that you can count on as a man is a possible
rise in your standard of living, as a result of the "two can live as
cheaply as one" syndrome, plus the fact that the woman you marry is
likely to have her own income. However, that rise in your standard of
living may well come to an abrupt end, if your wife decides she wants a
divorce.

Ah, but you cannot count on that for fear that the wife will just decide,
unilaterally, to be a SAH homemaker.

If a man doesn't want his W to be a SAHM there is a fairly simple
solution.
File for divorce at the onset of her SAHM career.

Yep but either way, she stands a good to excellent chance to gain money
and/or property, for nothing.

How would she *gain money and/or property, for nothing* if she is working
and
contributing just like her H is?

It sounds like you don't just disagree with the support aspects of divorce,
but
also feel when two people marry their contributions should charted and each
should only get back what they put in financially, am I correct in this
assumption?


Any judge would send her
swiftly back into the workforce.

No, the judge will only pronounce divorce. What she does is up to her. She
may become a panhandler or marry someone who will support her.

Point being the judge won't set CS, in an income shares state, at a rate
based
on just her H's income

Those who have bothered to spend any time studying the tables have pointed out
repeatedly that they are set up such that changes in the CP's income have
little or negative effect on the NCP's payments, with the result being that for
all intents and purposes even "income shares" states take a percentage based
just on the NCP's income.

and won't order SS providing she earns comparable to
her
stbx.


All assets would be split 50/50.

Not necessarily. My experience with this type "50/50" is: wife gets house
and stuff, husband gets bills for house and stuff.

That is more of a tinsletown movie line than it is reality.


If said man
was smart he married an equal income earner and will pay no alimony. All
that
will be left to figure out will be CS, and if he lives in an income shares
state her salary will keep his CS in line with the level of income they
BOTH
earn.

And above it all, no state's guidelines are in line with children's costs or
needs,

I would perfer to see actual costs used as oppossed to the averages now used.
Of course some NCPs would pay less and some would pay more than they do right
now.

neither is the custodial parent limited as to the use of the C$.

Accountability is needed, I agree.

For
all intents and purposes, C$ *is* alimony, only as C$ it is not deductible.

Any portion of CS that isn't being used for the child or for something that
benefits the child that portion could be looked at as hidden alimony.



Hmmmm..... I wonder how many divorces are due to the H not wanting the W
to be
a SAHM? My guess would be not many, at least not at the onset. Of course
it
tends to be a major bone of contention when the men no longer benefit from
their wife giving up their career, and they feel all that is earned and
has
been earned is theirs and theirs alone.

What you see as "giving up their career" I see as parasitic.

Apparently many other men don't agree with you, unless they divorce.


I don't think having a wife is a necessary condition for sucess in any
endeavor except divorce.

If a man wants kids and those kids to have a parent available to them to do
the
tasks that they require, while he can still pursue his career without having
to take time off and still have leisure time, then a SAHM is a condition that
can and does accomplish this for a man.

Any "services" provided by wifes can be purchased
outright, often with better results

I'm starting to think you might have been better suited to hiring a surrogate
mother than have been married. That or since you chose to marry a real slug
you
deem all/most women as slugs.

and far cheaper.

LOL Really? I don't know where you live but to get all the things done that
most SAHMs I know, do in this area, the average income earner couldn't afford
to pay the price.

You flatter yourself. It's not becoming on you...

Mel Gamble

Some can be obtained
free of charge.

Free? Without taking advantage of friends or relatives? List them would you,
I'm sure there are plenty of parents out there that could benefit greatly
from
your knowledge on how to get some of what a SAHM does done for free.

Mrs Indyguy


Phil #3


Mrs Indyguy