how about 150k in stock, then you have 401k's, a house, ect... anyone getting a divorce that has something of value should get a lawyer imo, I think that is good advice .
well the couple may have decided not to combine their finances at the beginning of the marriage under my method... giving each of them a clean break with nothing to worry about... or maybe they decided to bind each other financially... in which case we could just make it a 50/50 split for those assets... since they bound themselves together, there is nothing to really argue fuss or fight over since its known ahead of time the results... one person if they want to keep the house can pay the other their "share" of its current value, or they can both choose to liquidate it and once again 50/50... either debt or profit... its just so easy to do this without lawyers in a small claims style of court, in this case divorce court without lawyers for instance... there is just no trick I can't account for, except a prenup, which I think should be banned anyhow... if you're going to marry someone and promise until death do us part, or commit to someone in a way that you're legally bound, you should trust them enough to split it all... otherwise whats the purpose of legally binding yourself if you have another legally binding contract not to bind yourselves... basically exactly what my method provides... you can get married and not legally bind yourselves to each other financially yet still absorb some of the "spouse" benefits and protections under law... and split easily... why do you think we need lawyers for the 401k, stocks, and house... is there a state in this country that wouldn't divide those assets roughly 50/50 without lawyers who try to pick over who gets curtains and who gets the monogram towels... all they do is find a reason to justify their expensive services that we could handle without them today...
it's not that easy most of the time, you assume most people use common sense during a divorce, that seems to be more of a rarity but if both parties remain sane, even under the current system then they do not need to lawyer up if it was not a "legal" marriage, the first person to grab the money and run would get it .
and I don't deny its possible under my system for one person to "grab the money and run"... but to a limited extent to which they have access to it... you're making an assumption they both have access to it... in the result of a 401k only the earner would have access, likely in the case of stocks one person would have access through their social security number... in the event of joint accounts, I don't dent they equally have access, no different than marriages today when one drains the accounts before leaving... thats nothing new so its not something thats not already a problem, my solution doesn't uniquely add to this or remove it... although in my case, you could go to small claims and have a judge order some returned once its clear the person did it... harder in the case of separate accounts where one was slowly stuffing leave money away... I just don't see why a method that offers even more choices, with or without cooperation would not be preferred... what unique advantage does the current system have, that mine isn't perfectly capable of offering? what scenario is impossible? mine offers more choice and flexibility... isn't choice what america is all about... if people choose not to exercise parts of their choices, why shouldn't they at least have the option to... why should we compel and force them to get a lawyer when the other does... I think its well accepted across the country now, it should be a 50/50 division of assets, and there is no reason a judge couldn't do that without expensive lawyers doing the judges job... why should we compel people to hire a lawyer to counter the other persons lawyer? its one big ripoff... in some instances it'll be needed, in most it won't, yet they'll still retain one at a great expense... lets remove that expense...
Planet X takes 10K-20K earth years to rotate the sun just once, thereby refuting the validity of your religion. Pay up by April 15th.
if they are married, they they should legally both have the right to access it, otherwise your showing another flaw in your non-legal marriages
a bank can't just give a wife or husband access to an account thats not opened jointly... are you confusing a joint and personal account? married couples routinely have separate and joint accounts today, so once again this is nothing my method created, it exists under the current system already...
sure they can, the courts can very easily grant access to that money to a spouse, they can even grant access to a 401k and future earning "alimony" in fact the wife could write a check out to herself and cash it... via a money transfer, no theft involved .
the COURTS could... not the BANK... hence why I said my method changes nothing in aspect to this... same results, same options... no need for lawyers... and once again you're confusing joint accounts with individual accounts... the wife can't write out a check from her husbands account, unless its a joint account... and like I said most married couple have joint and separate accounts... hence the husband or wife couldn't steal money from the others individual account, that would be a felony... they could only take money from the joint account, and no bank on this planet would give a spouse NOT listed on an account, access to the funds of another... thats illegal... pay attention to how I word things and how you're wording things, there are very critical details being differentiated there...
yes the wife can write out a check on the husband account, there is absolutely nothing legally he can do to stop her
she can't legally do that on HIS account... she can only do that on a JOINT account... very clear and important legal difference... its fraud to use a checking account that you are not named on... and on a personal account in the husbands name only, that is fraud... only on joint accounts may they write checks out on that shared pool of money...
actually she can and there is nothing he could do about it, as long as they are married, they are one in the eyes of the law
okay I guess we're going to have to completely disagree on this one... its fraud and grant theft, and many spouses have been facing charges for doing this exact thing in many states... they can drain joint accounts legally, but they can't drain accounts they are not linked to, thats still illegal... same reason a parent can't drain a kids account... same reason your roommate can't drain your account, same reason a stranger can't drain your account, only those listed on the account can access the funds until a court intervenes and says otherwise with a court order... you can't just do it because you wanted to do it...
link me to one spouse convicted of this, or even charged the only way it would be a crime is if they were already in the process of getting a divorce, IE the other person was severed with divorce papers roommates are nothing like spouses, when you marry, you both become one under the law... what is his is hers and visa versa ..... roommates are just roommates ...
you seem a little dopey. what the hell are you talking about? just become a humanist. humanism is recognized as a religion. or a religious buddhist. buddhists don't require a god concept in their religion.
how about I quote websites giving advice to women going through divorce, as well as banking websites, and I guess I could throw in a few legal firms who represent people who attempt to do what you are claiming is perfectly legal before, during, or after a divorce, it doesn't matter when they do it, its illegal to forge checks... http://www.womansdivorce.com/divorce-bank.html http://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/can-spouse-access-savings-account-permission/ http://finance.zacks.com/can-spouse-legally-withdraw-funds-bank-account-1381.html you can not forge checks and empty accounts you are not listed on, you can not empty a personal savings account you are not listed on, you can not take what you want without following the law... you can only empty JOINT accounts or accounts you are both listed on as authorized to access, credit cards etc also... if a wife maxes out HIS personal credit cards she is not listed as an authorized person, that too is fraud and she can be held liable for all the charges, as well as criminal charges for fraud... this is almost the exact same terms in all 50 states... the ONLY time a woman will get access to an account she is NOT listed on as authorized, is when a court orders it... but the court doesn't just give her checks to write or access to it, they contact the financial institution or order the person who holds the account to issue a check for a set amount made payable to the spouse, and they generally have a very short deadline for such a transaction to take place or the other spouse is in violation of the court order and now can be held in jail until compliance... this is nothing new, this isn't my creative interpretation of law, this is a result of decades of practiced law and clear precedent laid out in almost all 50 states the same... you can't commit fraud to drain accounts not in your name... if the spouse is listed, its not fraud, and they have every legal authority to drain them... but we're discussing the difference between separate and joint accounts... they are NOT the same until a court order declares the marital assets to be distributed in such a way after a divorce is filed... prior to a divorce filing, the spouse gets no extra rights to drain them if they are not listed as being authorized on that account to do so... its just pure fraud...
I have yet to see anyone charged with that crime and convicted.... maybe I am wrong and you can provide a link what would happen is during the divorce, the judge would order her to give back what is his... usually 50% .
if she took it from a personal account, which may or may not be a martial asset, as not all assets are marital assets, she might have to give back 100%... but once again, you need to differential JOINT and SEPARATE accounts... they are NOT the same thing... and the whole contention you made before was a wife has a legal right to access and drain his SEPARATE account, which I rejected and provided sufficient evidence she can't legally access it because its fraudulent to do so, and only a judge can order removal of funds from that account... assuming like I just said above, they are marital assets, if they are not marital assets, depending on what type they are, the wife may have ZERO right to them even in a divorce... so once again, NOBODY can legally withdraw funds from an account they are not authorized to do so from, being married does not automatically authorize you to access an account of your spouse, thats illegal in all 50 states... P.S. sorry forgot you wanted "links or it didn't happen" to women arrested for forging husbands signature on checks... here is a horrible story below about a guy off serving during war and his wife drained his accounts that were only in his name, and she was not listed as someone authorized to write checks... http://www.twincities.com/2013/08/07/vadnais-heights-woman-forged-estranged-husbands-checks-charges-say/
I don't like the OP's new religion, as my new religion considers it heretical, therefore I am commanded by my gods (chiefly Glub, the god of stagnation) to destroy that religion.
No one "pays no taxes whstsoever", everyone pays some taxes. Some people have a net income tax in the negative, but they still have property taxes or rent (ehich property taxes are rolled into), pretty much everyone pays dales taxes.
We have several. In fact, we're not really sure of how many. My theological college is still looking into it. Would you care to make a contribution to their good work? Oh wait, this just in from the theological college, Glub is definitely one of our gods, tier 1 in fact, Stagnation is a most important part of life, it seems. You will undoubtedly want to make a contribution to help this information get out, how much shall I put you down for? - - - Updated - - - We have several. In fact, we're not really sure of how many. My theological college is still looking into it. Would you care to make a contribution to their good work? Oh wait, this just in from the theological college, Glub is definitely one of our gods, tier 1 in fact, Stagnation is a most important part of life, it seems. You will undoubtedly want to make a contribution to help this information get out, how much shall I put you down for?
You have NO clue how religious exemption on taxes work, do you? Ministers are not exempt from paying federal income taxes. Since 1943 (Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105), the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment guaranty of religious freedom is not violated by subjecting ministers to the federal income tax. And yet, ministers have tried to argue against this ruling for decades. The courts have rejected every attempt by them (some with only mail-order credentials) to claim that they are exempt from the payment of income taxes.
The OP would not work. Only things used directly by the church for religious and charitable reasons are exempt. A local babtist minister tried to claim a house he bought as property of the church for tax exemption, and was arrested because the building served no official church service. The minister also still has to pay personal taxes on income, and the church still owes payroll taxes for employees. The church is only exempt from paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on things like car registration (if the car is used only for official church business)
I understand what your saying, but in reality it rareley works that way it would be like trying to charge someone with adultery where adultery was still on the books.... rarely happens if ever in your link she forged his signature, she should of used her own signature and she would of got away with it, she was not charged with theft, she was charged with forgery could easily move money from a standalone account to a joint account electronically for instance all I am saying is if you divorce, move your money to new accounts to keep it safe while the divorce is pending .
