Page 16 of 26 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 257

Thread: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

  1. #151
    Senior Member USN - Retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ewa Beach, Hawaii
    Posts
    702
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    1. You are the only one arguing that the law ought to automatically provide retirement to spouses..
    You are incorrect.

    I wasn't "arguing". I simply made a proposal for purposes of discussion (post 105 of this thread). I even admitted (in post 129 of this thread) that aspects of my proposal stink, but my proposal seems to be a fair compromise. Additionally, I proposed that a military spouse with less than six years of marriage would get none of the military retirement.


    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    2. If you have NO belief or confidence in our courts...it does not matter what the laws say. At end of the day, someone is going to have to make a judgement on some things...and it seems to me you will never be happy with any law that allows for judges to make judgements because of the disdain you hold for them.
    You are again incorrect (and it appears that you have missed my point).

    Family court judges have way too much power, and they have proven time and again that they will abuse that power. We need to have laws that limit their power. Then perhaps I will have some confidence in the family court system.

  2. #152
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Well, I'm not in the reserves yet, but I plan to be. In which case, I'll actually have some leverage. My wife, at any time, could be inheriting the very house she grew up in... from her grandmother, who is 95 years old. The house isn't worth much - I'd say no higher than $60K, since the last upgrades to that house probably happened back in the 1980's - but it has sentimental value to my wife.

    If she inherits the house, it becomes both our property. Do I WANT that house? Fuck no. But if SHE wants it, she'll leave my retirement alone.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  3. #153
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SW. Michigan
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    My ex cleaned out the bank accounts and left. Filed for devorce in her home state. I hired a lawyer in her home state. I think the main factor for her signing off of my retirement was she snagged the bank accounts and took it all out of state. Had we gone to court she would have had to fess up with all the $ she took to be divided equally. I don't believe she could have done it. She was wanting to re-marry....I just waited her out. I was basically left with my next paycheck, but got to keep my (hopefully) future retirement.

  4. #154
    Senior Member USN - Retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ewa Beach, Hawaii
    Posts
    702
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    They were married 20 years. She didn't get much. She had someone else and I believe felt somewhat guilty.
    Hard to believe. Very hard to believe. Might be true, but still hard to believe. Sounds like propaganda from the military spouse community.

    If it is true, then it is a very rare example. A VERY rare example. And that's why it is hard to believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    If USN had his way, she would have been automatically entitled to it, by law.
    Wrong again. If I had my way...

    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Here's what I would like.

    As much as possible, the family court would not be involved with marriages and divorce. In a divorce, all property that is legally titled as joint property, would be divided in half. Houses, land, bank accounts that are jointly owned is joint property. Divide them in half. If there is no legal paperwork that says the property is jointly owned, then it is not jointly owned. Unless the military spouse can show some paperwork, such as a prenuptial agreement, that the military retirement income is jointly owned, then it is not jointly owned. Divorce would be simple and the divorce lawyers would starve.

    None of that will ever happen. It just won't happen. My plan would deprive all the slimy divorce lawyers with a means to make lots of money. They would most certainly fight my plan..

  5. #155
    Senior Member USN - Retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ewa Beach, Hawaii
    Posts
    702
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    I just believe that while you are married...you entered into a legal agreement that essentially makes you a joint entity, financially and otherwise...and that what is earned while you're in that status is jointly earned.
    Does your marriage contract specifically state that you entered into a legal agreement that essentially makes you a joint entity, financially and otherwise...and that what is earned while you're in that status is jointly earned?

    In this day and age, why should marriage be a legal agreement that essentially makes you a joint entity, financially and otherwise? I know "what" the law says, I just don't believe that the law really serves a purpose. Specifically, I don't see why the government needs to be involved in marriage and divorce.

    Given the large number of children who are born and raised out of wed-lock, and given the large number of children who are being raised by divorced parents, what purpose does marriage serve in our society today?

  6. #156
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Opt out
    Posts
    2,285
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Does your marriage contract specifically state that you entered into a legal agreement that essentially makes you a joint entity, financially and otherwise...and that what is earned while you're in that status is jointly earned?

    In this day and age, why should marriage be a legal agreement that essentially makes you a joint entity, financially and otherwise? I know "what" the law says, I just don't believe that the law really serves a purpose. Specifically, I don't see why the government needs to be involved in marriage and divorce.

    Given the large number of children who are born and raised out of wed-lock, and given the large number of children who are being raised by divorced parents, what purpose does marriage serve in our society today?
    You are bringing up points far beyond the scope of the USFSPA. I think, USFSPA is essentially on par with other divorce laws in place throughout the country...that's what makes it "fair."

  7. #157
    Senior Member USN - Retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ewa Beach, Hawaii
    Posts
    702
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    You are bringing up points far beyond the scope of the USFSPA. I think, USFSPA is essentially on par with other divorce laws in place throughout the country...that's what makes it "fair."
    Using your form of logic ... Back in the 1950's, the segregation laws in Alabama were on par with the segregation laws in Mississippi and Georgia, and that's what made them "fair".

    You are basically using "unfair" laws to justify other "unfair" laws.

    I challenge you to ponder the questions that I have asked.

  8. #158
    Senior Member 20+Years's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Central Canada
    Posts
    512
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Eventually there has to be changes. I agree to equal division, IF, both partners were equal in contributing to the marriage. Being married doesn't automatically make you a contributing member to the marriage, trust me.

    My first marriage started off with, "Could I stay home for a year or two with our (stepson to me) child while he's still little"? Sure, 2 years paid by me to stay home and do what you want. Long story is dependapotomaus, but you think she should have been "earning" part of my retirement in those first two years? What about the years she was overextending our credit, spending all we had, or doing drugs and such to the detrement of my career?

    I mean really, one shoe does not fit all. Equal distribution laws are pathetic, each case has its own story. There is one clause definitely needed with USFSPA.

    Lawyer: "Judge, we would like to enter the dependapotamous clause".
    Judge: "Split assests. Retirement pay stays with the contributing member." *Bangs gavel*
    Advice from JD2780:

    "don't post angry"

  9. #159
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Opt out
    Posts
    2,285
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Using your form of logic ... Back in the 1950's, the segregation laws in Alabama were on par with the segregation laws in Mississippi and Georgia, and that's what made them "fair".

    You are basically using "unfair" laws to justify other "unfair" laws.
    No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What is a "fair deal" in divorce proceedings is not on the same plane as racial discrimination.

    I'm saying USFSPA operates within a greater context...

    Or, i could say...using your logic. Since you don't think that the government should be involved in marriage at all...that it would be okay to ban a state from licensing interracial couples...since might be a first step to the govt. getting out of marriage altogether.

    I challenge you to ponder the questions that I have asked.
    I have pondered them often and always give you the same result.

    For the most part, I agree with getting the govt. out of marriage. It creates some other complications initially...but mostly those are able to be overcome. As I understand it, there are some 1100+ laws and regulations that either deal with marriage, or deal with benefits and privileges of marriage...some of those would have to be addressed in other ways.

    However, getting govt. out of the marriage business does not and should not begin with the USFSPA...it is a much greater fight. Doing it solely with the USFSPA is akin to trying to make racing fair by giving a restrictor plate to only one team...and arguing that to be fair, they all should have one, so it's a positive step to give it to just one.

  10. #160
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Opt out
    Posts
    2,285
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)

    Quote Originally Posted by 20+Years View Post
    Eventually there has to be changes. I agree to equal division, IF, both partners were equal in contributing to the marriage. Being married doesn't automatically make you a contributing member to the marriage, trust me.

    My first marriage started off with, "Could I stay home for a year or two with our (stepson to me) child while he's still little"? Sure, 2 years paid by me to stay home and do what you want. Long story is dependapotomaus, but you think she should have been "earning" part of my retirement in those first two years? What about the years she was overextending our credit, spending all we had, or doing drugs and such to the detrement of my career?

    I mean really, one shoe does not fit all. Equal distribution laws are pathetic, each case has its own story. There is one clause definitely needed with USFSPA.

    Lawyer: "Judge, we would like to enter the dependapotamous clause".
    Judge: "Split assests. Retirement pay stays with the contributing member." *Bangs gavel*
    So...your point is that you think the USFSPA should NOT automatically divide retirement...and that maybe it should say something like..."courts may divide retirement pay, but don't have to...we leave that up to the states and their courts"?

    Would something like that work for you?

Similar Threads

  1. BAH Going Away?
    By Mjölnir in forum BAH
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 01-06-2017, 06:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •