Ca
Can she have 30% of your estate from now until she dies? Even if she gets remarried?
What about the tax deductions?
How bout the house? She could get one of your cars.
Like trust, it's not just about what you have now, but what you'll have in the future because they def award women **** you don't have, the 'impute' income, which means they make up what you should have and give her half. Honestly, it's not fair.
It depends.
See, the problem with a lot of people's thinking on this is that they focus too much on the individual. A marriage is a legal union - when you get married you are giving up an amount of absolute - for lack of better word - control over every aspect of your personal life in favor creating a union from which you are supposed to benefit - you also receive very strong influence in the life of your partner in exchange. Things aren't YOURS anymore; they're OURS. ...You don't want that, don't get married - nobody forces you to do so. That's the bargain you make - pre-nup or not.
I know the 50s nuclear family model isn't a reality for many, but let's say you have children and after one parent decides to be a stay at home mom or dad. That person is making no income (or little income), but there is tremendous value - economic value as well as social value - to you and to the family for that person doing so. That person is also sacrificing years of work experience, skills generation, etc. so that if that person does decide to go back to work later - maybe after a divorce - that person's earning potential and very hire-ability has been seriously damaged, set back for years - possibly irrevocably.
The person who did continue to work did not suffer that - that person directly benefited in many ways short and long term from the willingness of the other to sacrifice as part of a union for the betterment of the whole unit. Once that unit isn't in tact, it's not unreasonable for the previous beneficiary to pay reparations of sorts to the other one who made practical sacrifices that tangibly impacted his/her life. That person not only got to continue his/her career and get promotions, raises, etc., but that person did not have to pay for child care in order to retain their professional upward mobility. And, those dynamics do not go away simply because a party enters another relationship. If I quit my job to raise the kids I have with my wife and we then divorce, what the hell does who I then date or re-marry have to do with the huge hole I've dug myself as a professional?
So, I don't think it's absolute. My wife and I have no kids, etc. I don't think you could make a credible argument that, up until this point, our union has prevented either of us from progressing in individual ways for the betterment of the union. Maintaining our personal independence as much as possible while reaping the legal and financial benefits of marriage is one of the ideals on which my marriage rests. But, there are plenty of cases when it happens. So, yes, there are cases in which it could be justified for one person to get reparations from the other for an extended period of time, regardless of remarriage, etc.
...The other thing that rubs people the wrong way about pre-nups is the "who do you think you are aspect of it" People who I know who have money, they either sign agreements or they don't, but it's a behind closed doors thing and they don't talk about. It's always the bums who don't have jack in the first place who talk about - that b- ain't getting half of nuthin. ...It's like relax, bruh, ain't nobody trying to trap you for you "VVVVNDS" Space Jams.
