Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That, and are there any actual examples of these so-called arrangements, or is it just hearsay that you read in Star Magazine?
Many probably do have prenups. If I had millions and millions of dollars I would have one too, unless my SO was equally as rich. It makes economic sense to protect vast assets.
But the reality is most of us are not rich. Why have a prenup that says "I get to keep my 1990 Honda Accord and you get to keep your 1991 Toyota"
Many probably do have prenups. If I had millions and millions of dollars I would have one too, unless my SO was equally as rich. It makes economic sense to protect vast assets.
But the reality is most of us are not rich. Why have a prenup that says "I get to keep my 1990 Honda Accord and you get to keep your 1991 Toyota"
Exactly. When I married at 28, it would have been ridiculous. But now, if I suddenly lost my wife at age 49, I would have a good to protect.
Many probably do have prenups. If I had millions and millions of dollars I would have one too, unless my SO was equally as rich. It makes economic sense to protect vast assets.
But the reality is most of us are not rich. Why have a prenup that says "I get to keep my 1990 Honda Accord and you get to keep your 1991 Toyota"
Most of them also have prenups because many, many, many celebs' marriages DO end in divorce. I think it's hard to maintain relationships when you are living that kind of life - going off to make movies all the time, having to travel all over the world, not getting that much time to yourself. I think that Matt Damon has a clause in all of his movie contracts that he gets a certain amount of time off every few weeks or so to spend with his family or something.
Point being - why worry about what the rich and famous do. Who cares? Kobe's divorce has virtually no impact on my life. Same with Britney Spears.
Many probably do have prenups. If I had millions and millions of dollars I would have one too, unless my SO was equally as rich. It makes economic sense to protect vast assets.
But the reality is most of us are not rich. Why have a prenup that says "I get to keep my 1990 Honda Accord and you get to keep your 1991 Toyota"
True, but onihC seems to be talking about extravagant pre-nups where these already rich women are demanding a shopping budget and a new car every year.
Exactly. When I married at 28, it would have been ridiculous. But now, if I suddenly lost my wife at age 49, I would have a good to protect.
And I totally understand that. From now on - no matter what happens to my husband or I - our son will always come first. If either my husband or I pass away - and the other one remarried - we would definitely make provisions for him. I can understand prenups for 2nd marriages. But for me - there wouldn't have been a first marriage if my husband had wanted one. Plus - he didn't really have anything so I'm not sure what it would have been for! Like Djuna said - a 1991 Pathfinder?
Most of them also have prenups because many, many, many celebs' marriages DO end in divorce. I think it's hard to maintain relationships when you are living that kind of life - going off to make movies all the time, having to travel all over the world, not getting that much time to yourself. I think that Matt Damon has a clause in all of his movie contracts that he gets a certain amount of time off every few weeks or so to spend with his family or something.
Point being - why worry about what the rich and famous do. Who cares? Kobe's divorce has virtually no impact on my life. Same with Britney Spears.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleetiebelle
True, but onihC seems to be talking about extravagant pre-nups where these already rich women are demanding a shopping budget and a new car every year.
Those were my points. Celebrities and the rich have no bearing on anyone's lives except their own and who gives a toss about them, they're indulged and full of themselves.
Average Joe on the street generally don't worry about prenups because they simply aren't relevant.
No prenup here - we came into it with roughly same amount of assets/liabilities.
If you leave the assets alone as originally titled, spouse has no claim on those pre-marriage assets. Spouse will have claim on assets/liabilities created during marriage.
Now, if in the event of a dissolution by deceased parties and children are involved, then prior to re-marrying would require a pre-nup. This is to protect the interests of children.
They are rich and they are less than 1% of the population. Their reality is not the majority.
Sure, not everybody is rich but having a prenup sounds advisable for rich men. It doesn’t guarantee he will get to keep 100% of his assets but, still, better than nothing I suppose.
A prenup doesn’t make that much sense to me if both come up from similar economic backgrounds, both have a career, both work, etc.
How about those prenups where women make their rich husband sign to promise to fulfill a long list of demands? Catherine Zeta Jones, one of the Kardashians, I believe also Salma Hayek did it to her billionaire husband, Kathie Holmes, etc. These prenups involves ther husband agreeing to give them X amount of money a month, X amount at the end of the year, X amount if he cheats, X amount of money for her shopping, a new car every year, access to his bank account, etc.
onihC,
You are picking the worst reason / example to debate prenups. People will always use the "celebs are not reality" counter argument and highlight how much money they still have after the divorce is over. Plus, in your "rich wife demands" these men agreed to those demands anyway so it's their own fault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djuna
Many probably do have prenups. If I had millions and millions of dollars I would have one too, unless my SO was equally as rich. It makes economic sense to protect vast assets.
But the reality is most of us are not rich. Why have a prenup that says "I get to keep my 1990 Honda Accord and you get to keep your 1991 Toyota"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djuna
Those were my points. Celebrities and the rich have no bearing on anyone's lives except their own and who gives a toss about them, they're indulged and full of themselves.
Average Joe on the street generally don't worry about prenups because they simply aren't relevant.
You are right about why celebs need a prenup. I am surprised you don't see why a non-rich person would need protection.
A devastating divorce would be much more difficult to recover from if a person has less income and assets compared to a celeb. I've had plenty of "average" clients who had to continue paying for a house they no longer live in plus their new place. Some had to give up the car they shared, or had to sell it to split the money. Now they had to buy a new one, added expense. Add child support (valid but should be mentioned in overall costs), plus alimony if their spouse was not working at the time of the split. In some states some of these can't be avoided, which is why I recommend not signing a marriage license at all instead of hoping a pre-nup will work.
Celebs will still have enough and have good future earning potential after a tough divorce, but a regular person may not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Like Djuna said - a 1991 Pathfinder? 
