Advertisement
|
|
12-01-2021, 20:43 | #62 |
Registered User
![]() |
I don't know. Never dreamt of the big white dress and wedding and if I was in a position to get married it would be a registry office job without all that centre of attention of a wedding. Lock down wedding would be my ideal.
My parents are together 40 years, still in love and a very strong relationship. I would love that but at the same time you are essentially gambling your assets and future income. While I would happily sign a pre-nup if they had any legal standing before the wedding but I know myself well enough that if it was a case of just drifting apart, I would never pursue a man for income/assets of I didn't need it to provide for my kids but if he cheated/left me for a young model/friend etc, I would happy screw him for everything he's got. Given co-habiting bill, would be even wary if a relationship longer than 5 years at the moment. |
![]() |
(4) thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 20:55 | #63 |
Registered User
![]() |
Only advice i ever give is don't. Just don't. Walk away.
There is a quote in film Wolf of Wall Street where the fat dude tells Di caproo that no guy that is married is happy. I know guys in their 40s that are unmarried and far happier. You don't need a day out. And it's implied that after marriage comes kids, which is worse. P Unmarried people tell me about this thing called 'a life' and it sounds divine. |
![]() |
(2) thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 20:56 | #64 |
Registered User
![]() |
If you go into marraige with any thought of "what's in it for me" you have completely missed the point and are bound to be unhappy
|
![]() |
(9) thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 20:57 | #65 | |
Registered User
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
Thanks from: |
Advertisement
|
|
12-01-2021, 20:59 | #66 |
Registered User
![]() |
|
![]() |
Thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 22:00 | #67 |
Registered User
![]() |
|
![]() |
(14) thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 23:00 | #68 |
Registered User
![]() |
Financially its not actually always worth it.
I know somebody who was in receipt of disability allowance up until she got married. Now she has to solely rely on her husbands income as the money he is on is above the threshold. She cant even claim any dole or nothing and ended up in hospital the last time she started working. She was on disability for a reason. |
![]() |
Thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 23:30 | #69 | |
Registered User
![]() |
Quote:
It is now his responsibility to take care of her. "In sickness and in health". |
|
![]() |
Advertisement
|
|
12-01-2021, 23:31 | #70 |
Registered User
![]() |
Of course it's worth it - getting to finally pop your cherry on wedding night
|
![]() |
Thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 23:34 | #71 |
Registered User
![]() |
If you are not married and a woman and have a baby, they send you to work in a laundry.
So maybe get married before getting pregnant |
![]() |
Thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 23:38 | #72 |
Registered User
![]() |
Worth it for legal and financial reasons alone. When one of you Oe the other is liable for inheritance tax on your deceased partners share of assets you own jointly. Also smoother if there are children involved
|
![]() |
Thanks from: |
12-01-2021, 23:45 | #73 |
Registered User
![]() |
Purely from a kinship/ pensions/ inheritance and parental rights it is totally worth it and cheaper than hiring a solicitor to deal with all those issues.
Ask yourself if you were hit by a bus tomorrow who would you like the world to look upon as your family, who would you want to make a medical decision if necessary, who would you want to care for your children, to inherit the house, to benefit from your pension or insurance policy. If you answered your parents don't get married , if you answered your partner then do. |
![]() |
12-01-2021, 23:54 | #74 |
Registered User
![]() |
As a man, If you walk into it thinking happy ever after, then you are a complete fool. It's far more likely nowadays that it is the woman who will be the one cheating. And it's no fun in your fifties trying to get a mortgage again.
|
![]() |
(7) thanks from: |
13-01-2021, 00:37 | #75 | |||||
Registered User
![]() |
Quote:
2 years, u lucky sod, I thought the honeymoon period was some kind of myth, because when I looked back after 2 years, it was no honeymoon, unfunnily, it had been looking back on the 2 years prior to the wedding. Quote:
Tax reasons are not a good reason to get married, nor should they be, nor should the State be allowed intervene to that extent to essential encourage/pressure based on withholding benefits. It's wrong that the State can confer responsibilities towards another Adult not married, but not the benefits, re tax, inheritance etc. I believe inheritance tax for mere mortals should be set at million per civil/cohabiting spouse and children, zero reason a cohabiting partner or child should pay inheritance tax under 1 million, after that it should be a increasing sliding scale. Most mere mortals would never get near 1 million inheritance and could appropriately, reasonably and correctly benefit their lives, could reduce debt or improve their lives in many ways in that it was money/assets their immediate family worked hard to earn and were likely heavily taxed on. A relative small number might pi$$ it down the drain or shoot it up their veins, but Id take the odds rather than the State squander it. Yeh, not the best reason to get married, and depending on what each person earns, there may actually be no immediate month to month benefit unless one of the people involved earns significantly less than the other people and can shift some of their tax credits to the higher earner. Quote:
I dont think so, because you actually have quite limited rights anyway, but you dont have less rights not being married (just the same limited rights). Where you have less rights is (to your children, basically none) if you are not named as a father. Best scenario I see (for the man), having children, but not being married, maybe even further than that, probably not live with them (unfortunately), unfortunately, for the bloke, he may still very likely get screwed over. Quote:
Quote:
But, if a woman cheats her husband/left him for someone else, she can still screw him for everything he's got? but it's different for a guy. IMO you're either of the mind to drop someone or not and move on, again IMO especially if there are no kids, but even when there are, the Courts dont look at those circumstances (not that I condone cheating). Personally I think both parties should take what they brought and split what they contributed pro rata per contributions, because it would discourage Marriage piracy. Any childrens care should be 50:50 or pro rata to set limits or based on their incomes or their educational level to the kind of work they could get. Ive heard it mentioned, women couldnt get back into x work after marriage, but guys are expected to live on nothing in very limiting and harsh circumstances. Last edited by 1874; 13-01-2021 at 00:42. |
|||||
![]() |
Thanks from: |