Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: 'Radical' proposal would change the way retired pay is divided in divorce cases

  1. #11
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,468
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Another key difference is that a 401K has a known present value, at the time of the divorce.
    Yes...which is why I think an actuarial table could be made to find an equivalent value of a typical military retirement for X grade, X years of service, etc. Wouldn't be perfect, but it would be pretty fair, I think...and would get it over and done with.

    A lot of times what happens is that court requires the man to cash out his 401K and pay the entitled cheating bitch a % (of what's left after taxes/ penalties and fees). The state sponsored prostitute doesn't get to stake claim to his future contributions and continue financially raping his earnings for the rest of his life.

    It's also important to note that the concept of "No fault Divorce" first originated in Bolshevik Russia, In order to destroy the traditional family structure and allow the Communist State to Manage the population.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-fault_divorce

    "The earliest precedent[citation needed] in no-fault divorce laws was originally enacted in Russia shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution. The 1918 Decree on Divorce allowed divorce "by mutual consent declared at the Registry Office, or upon the application of one spouse to the court."[3] The purpose of the Soviet no-fault divorce laws was ideological, intended to revolutionize society at every level.[3][4]"

    Hello McFly? Are we seeing the trend here yet? It's always The Same.... Fucking..... Agenda....... Every.....Fucking..... Time.....
    United States[edit]

    See also: Divorce in the United States
    California was the first U.S. state to pass a no-fault divorce law. Its law was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan and came into effect on January 1, 1970.[18] New York was the last state to pass a no-fault divorce law; that law was passed in 2010.[19][20]
    Before no-fault divorce was available, it was common for spouses seeking divorce to allege false grounds for divorce. Removing the incentive to perjury was one motivation for the no-fault movement.[18]
    Last edited by Bos Mutus; 08-02-2016 at 06:37 PM.
    The Voice of Reason

  2. #12
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,788
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Of course, state legislators/courts are already free to do this if they choose...not sure why this guy is saying he was unable to do it as a state legislator due to conflicts with federal law...the federal law just allows states to deal with the federal pension how they want..it doesn't tell them how they should do it.
    That was my understanding as well ... USFSPA simply told the states they were allowed to look at the federal pension as community property ... if and how they did it was really in their court (court ... get it?).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    USFSPA was originally pitched as a way to prevent these General Officer scumbags from dumping their old hag wives for younger trophies and leaving them destitute, after a lifetime of service. It's a noble sounding idea and There'd probably be no problem with this law, if not for the fact that all 50 states now have 'NO FAULT DIVORCE' laws (which prevent people from being held accountable for their actions).

    USFSPA needs more than just a radical change. It should be repealed immediately. It's sponsor was the radical feminist CONgresswoman Pat Schroeder (that hated both men and the male dominated Military).

    In Rainmaker's experience, More often than not, USFSPA just allows Psycho bitch ex-wives to fuck over the G.I's for the rest of their lives.
    I don't know if it was designed to target FOGO's or not. I don't agree with repealing it ... it just tells states they can consider retired pay as community property.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  3. #13
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,788
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Of course, state legislators/courts are already free to do this if they choose...not sure why this guy is saying he was unable to do it as a state legislator due to conflicts with federal law...the federal law just allows states to deal with the federal pension how they want..it doesn't tell them how they should do it.
    That was my understanding as well ... USFSPA simply told the states they were allowed to look at the federal pension as community property ... if and how they did it was really in their court (court ... get it?).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    USFSPA was originally pitched as a way to prevent these General Officer scumbags from dumping their old hag wives for younger trophies and leaving them destitute, after a lifetime of service. It's a noble sounding idea and There'd probably be no problem with this law, if not for the fact that all 50 states now have 'NO FAULT DIVORCE' laws (which prevent people from being held accountable for their actions).

    USFSPA needs more than just a radical change. It should be repealed immediately. It's sponsor was the radical feminist CONgresswoman Pat Schroeder (that hated both men and the male dominated Military).

    In Rainmaker's experience, More often than not, USFSPA just allows Psycho bitch ex-wives to fuck over the G.I's for the rest of their lives.
    I don't know if it was designed to target FOGO's or not. I don't agree with repealing it ... it just tells states they can consider retired pay as community property.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,812
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    See also: Divorce in the United States
    California was the first U.S. state to pass a no-fault divorce law. Its law was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan and came into effect on January 1, 1970.[18] New York was the last state to pass a no-fault divorce law; that law was passed in 2010.[19][20]
    Before no-fault divorce was available, it was common for spouses seeking divorce to allege false grounds for divorce. Removing the incentive to perjury was one motivation for the no-fault movement.[18]
    Welcome back. Rainmaker hopes you have enjoyed your holiday. So Anyway, does that response mean that you think 'no-fault divorce' laws are a good thing for a society?

    Or is it simply that, you'd prefer to deflect attention away from Its Marxist, Judeo-Bolshevik origins and their stated purpose in the commie revolution, by pointing it out that 'Saint Reagan' was the first Governor of a state to sign it into law? Which BTW, he later admitted was one of the biggest mistakes of his political life ( & there were quite a few) .

    http://nationalaffairs.com/publicati...ion-of-divorce
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 08-02-2016 at 07:40 PM.

  5. #15
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,788
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Point taken, a job is not necessarily a career, but they still work...
    They do. I have seen spouses with college degrees and certified as teachers who worked at the PX because they were still in the process of getting certified in the new state they lived in, have seen a lawyer who was in the process of passing the bar in the new state who worked as a secretary ... not unemployed ... but definitely under-employed ... far from helpful for a career or personal edification.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,468
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Welcome back. Rainmaker hopes you have enjoyed your holiday. So Anyway, does that response mean that you think 'no-fault divorce' laws are a good thing for a society?
    No, it doesn't mean that...
    The Voice of Reason

  7. #17
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,812
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    No, it doesn't mean that...
    Rainmaker figured it had to be one or the other!
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 08-02-2016 at 08:09 PM.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,812
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    That was my understanding as well ... USFSPA simply told the states they were allowed to look at the federal pension as community property ... if and how they did it was really in their court (court ... get it?).



    I don't know if it was designed to target FOGO's or not. I don't agree with repealing it ... it just tells states they can consider retired pay as community property.
    The biggest problem is that courts don't take fault into account. Since the advent of no-fault divorce laws, 70% of divorces are initiated by women (a significant % are for no reason or no fault of the husband). Why should the military member be forced into supporting some non-hacker, dead-beat spouse for the rest of their life?

    In 24+ years Rainmaker saw this bullshit happen more times than he could count (and to women too). And (unlike alimony) the transfer payments never stop, Even when the initiating party remarries.

    It's a Morale killer and Huge Readiness issue and if we had any real Generals, that were worth a shit, they'd spend some time speaking out about this injustice, instead of playing email footsie & getting themselves honey- trapped by their Mossad double agent, girlfriends back in Tampa.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 08-02-2016 at 08:39 PM.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,468
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Rainmaker figured it had to be one or the other!
    Rainmaker figures lots of stuff that's bullshit...why change now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    The biggest problem is that courts don't take fault into account. Since the advent of no-fault divorce laws, 70% of divorces are initiated by women (a significant % are for no reason or no fault of the husband). Why should the military member be forced into supporting some non-hacker, dead-beat spouse for the rest of their life?

    In 24+ years Rainmaker saw this bullshit happen more times than he could count (and to women too). And (unlike alimony) the transfer payments never stop, Even when the initiating party remarries.

    It's a Morale killer and Huge Readiness issue and if we had any real Generals, that were worth a shit, they'd spend some time speaking out about this injustice, instead of playing email footsie & getting themselves honey- trapped by their Mossad double agent, girlfriends back in Tampa.
    Dividing military retirement is not about "supporting her for life", but rather splitting the portion of retirement earned during the marriage.. just so happens military retirement is a benefit that pays for life...and again, it's the states and courts that do it, not the USFSPA.

    Your argument is with the state of divorce, not with the USFSPA...really kind of beyond the scope of Generals, though the experience of servicemembers could certainly be used to illustrate the point.
    The Voice of Reason

  10. #20
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,788
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    The biggest problem is that courts don't take fault into account. Since the advent of no-fault divorce laws, 70% of divorces are initiated by women (a significant % are for no reason or no fault of the husband).
    I will agree, fault should play a part in the division of marital property. I have not really thought about it, but not sure at what point / level of fault that someone should surrender 100% of marital property to the other ... even in the case of adultery etc. especially when the one at fault was still contributing (monetary or otherwise).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Why should the military member be forced into supporting some non-hacker, dead-beat spouse for the rest of their life?
    Assuming that the former spouse was 100% deadbeat ... that may be a reason for the court to consider not awarding them a portion of the retirement. However, a spouse who was a stay-at-home care giver to the family's kids for 5 or 10 years, doing the laundry, cooking, cleaning etc. is far from a dead beat; neither is the spouse who took a job / any job to help financially support the family and the service member's career. I have seen a few truly 'dead beat' spouses / former spouses ... they aren't really the majority (IMO).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    In 24+ years Rainmaker saw this bullshit happen more times than he could count (and to women too). And (unlike alimony) the transfer payments never stop, Even when the initiating party remarries.
    Probably you see so many more military men than women impacted because the military is overwhelmingly male, especially once you go past first term personnel. The sample size is pretty skewed in favor of males, especially for those who go all the way to retirement.

    The transfer payments don't stop since the pension doesn't stop. It is community property, that the former spouse is entitled to a portion of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    It's a Morale killer and Huge Readiness issue and if we had any real Generals, that were worth a shit, they'd spend some time speaking out about this injustice, instead of playing email footsie & getting themselves honey- trapped by their Mossad double agent, girlfriends back in Tampa.
    Morale killer, yes. Readiness issue, not sure. I am sure there are those who will decide to separate vice ANYTHING going to the former spouse ... not sure if those numbers are sufficient to call it a real readiness issue or not.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

Posting Permissions

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