6 ms·

This is premature optimization. The California divorce regime is "community property", that is anything not covered under a prenuptial agreement is divided 50/

This is premature optimization. The California divorce regime is "community property", that is anything not covered under a prenuptial agreement is divided 50/50. A visit to a men's rights website will unearth horror stories of abusive alimony decrees but these anecdotes are unrepresentative outliers. A prenuptial agreement would safeguard you more than attempting to hide money overseas. Another safeguard would be to marry a person who wouldn't be eligible for alimony due to preexisting income. I consider this sort of optimization to be an inaccurate threat model, focused on outliers rather than the expected case. The expected case in California or any other state would be that the marriage would survive if not flourish (the most common case for upper-middle-class marriages), with a contingency that a divorce would occur amicably (the second-most common case). Screening for contentious attitudes is part of the due diligence of dating. (only on HN would I ever expect to post something like this instead of the common-sense "find the right spouse and work on your marriage and you won't have to worry about this issue")

ng12 10y ago
> find the right spouse and work on your marriage Why buy car insurance? Just find the right car and work on your driving.
- HarryHirsch 10y ago
  Wait a minute. Liability insurance is not for you, it's for all the other road users. The rest of the world won't put up with you being uncollectible when you cause damage with your vehicle, yet meanwhile reaping all the benefits.
  - sk5t 10y ago
    When you buy comprehensive insurance (or any other-than-liability) it is for your benefit, and sometimes also for your lender's.
  - mysterypie 10y ago
    The grandparent's analogy is perfectly apt. There are two reasons to get liability insurance for your car: To protect yourself and to protect society. Suppose liability insurance was entirely voluntary and not required by law. Would you get it? I'll bet you that most people with good income or significant assets would still buy it, just like people buy home or fire insurance even when not mandatory.
zeveb 10y ago
> with a contingency that a divorce would occur amicably (the second-most common case). Is that the second-most-common case? I haven't seen a single amicable divorce amongst my friends and colleagues. The level of nastiness has been different, of course, but it's never been amicable. Given the profound downsides that I've seen, I think that a prenuptial agreement is mandatory for anyone who chooses to marry in our era. Otherwise you're just going for the standard 'prenup' — and like the standard deduction on your taxes, it just ain't sufficient.
- linkregister 10y ago
  Dammit. While researching for some hard stats on this, I performed several Google searches containing the keywords "California divorce". Now I'm already getting divorce ads. Which my spouse might see. Better explain this one now before it becomes self-fulfilling ;) !
  - poikniok 10y ago
    Another great reason to have an ad blocker.
  - coredog64 10y ago
    That's what incognito mode is for. My cellphone provider is Cricket Wireless, and just leaving out the ".com" had Google showing me cards for cricket games for weeks on my Android. Now I only ever visit Cricket's website in incognito mode.
    - nitrogen 10y ago
      Ads could be targeted by IP.
  - sbov 10y ago
    Can you clear it on this page? I've used it before to clear out "temporary" interests. https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated
  - 10y ago
JustSomeNobody 10y ago
> find the right spouse and work on your marriage and you won't have to worry about this issue Because, unfortunately, it is way too easy to give up on a marriage[0] instead of trying to work it out. Marriage takes effort. [0] Preemptively, because surely someone will reply about it: If a spouse is getting beat, they aren't giving up on their marriage if they leave; they're protecting their life.
alexssung 10y ago
Uhh considering how divorce rates are near 50%, your assumption of divorces occurring amicably as a second-most common case would heavily depend on what portion of that 40-50% _does_ actually end in a friendly manner. Let's be extremely optimistic and say 80% of divorces occur amicably.. that would give us ~10% odds of a nasty divorce--which I would not chalk up to "outliers"
- ryuker16 10y ago
  divorce rates among upper income, educated folks is low. . . closer to 10-20% range. . . and to be fair some matches are just plain bad or green card marriages.
  - alexssung 10y ago
    That wasn't the point of my post. My point was that, no matter how you fudge the numbers, it's impossible to chalk up bad divorces as outliers. Outliers are defined as 3 standard deviations from the mean in a normal distribution, so the parent was implying that bad divorces occur at a rate of 0.1% or less--which is off by at least one order of magnitude.
    - kevinnk 10y ago
      > Outliers are defined as 3 standard deviations from the mean in a normal distribution I kind of agree with your overall point, but that definition is wildly incorrect.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - dboreham 10y ago
    Hey there, my green card marriage is coming up on 18 years strong..
- camiller 10y ago
  that 50% thing is not really true any more. http://bestdivorcelawyer.co/family-law/divorce-rates-higherincome-lowerincome-families/6886/ http://bestdivorcelawyer.co/family-law/divorce-rates-higheri...
cwmoo740 10y ago
You're sorely wrong. Divorces in several states, California included, are like mutually assured destruction with one side having twice the firepower, and everything about a relationship can change in a divorce. To OP: you don't have to hide your assets in offshore accounts, you can talk to an estate planner and look into setting up a trust (google domestic asset protection trust) and make yourself the sole beneficiary. You would no longer "own" the money and it's protected in a divorce. Also prenups are typically worthless in the madness that is family court. Never ever ever rely on one.
- sean_patel 10y ago
  > you can talk to an estate planner and look into setting up a trust (google domestic asset protection trust) and make yourself the sole beneficiary. You would no longer "own" the money and it's protected in a divorce. Thank you for this real and actionable advice. I found this article, and according to it, California does not allow it. I guess I'll have to move to 1 of those state? Not too bad lol. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2016/07/06/comparing-domestic-asset-protection-trust-states/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2016/07/06/compari...
- mysterypie 10y ago
  > Also prenups are typically worthless in the madness that is family court. Never ever ever rely on one. Are you saying that prenups are worthless in the case of child support or that prenups are worthless in all cases? In the case of child-related issues, you're right. However, in the case of dividing assets, I think you might be mistaken. I've read stories of super wealthy people with prenups who did not get screwed; i.e., the prenup held up. The best example I can find is a certain billionaire who got divorced, but I cannot mention his name without creating irrevelant political discussion. He had an ironclad prenup and it held. That's the point I want to make. Prenups still work.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - xenihn 10y ago
mahyarm 10y ago
You shouldn't wear a seat belt or a helmet, you should make sure your skills are the best and you should really choose the best bike! Shit happens, thats why we have audits, contracts and airbags and why many people avoid driving motorcycles vs. cars. There is stuff outside of our control and to get rid of unnecessary risk is a benefit in itself.
avn2109 10y ago
>> "...horror stories of abusive alimony decrees..." [0] is IMHO a fairly evenhanded (and comprehensive) treatment of divorce outcomes by state, partially written by an MIT CompSci professor. It was an eye opener, and I wouldn't call it a men's rights website. [0] http://www.realworlddivorce.com/ http://www.realworlddivorce.com/

ng12 10y ago

> find the right spouse and work on your marriage Why buy car insurance? Just find the right car and work on your driving.

HarryHirsch 10y ago
Wait a minute. Liability insurance is not for you, it's for all the other road users. The rest of the world won't put up with you being uncollectible when you cause damage with your vehicle, yet meanwhile reaping all the benefits.
- sk5t 10y ago
  When you buy comprehensive insurance (or any other-than-liability) it is for your benefit, and sometimes also for your lender's.
- mysterypie 10y ago
  The grandparent's analogy is perfectly apt. There are two reasons to get liability insurance for your car: To protect yourself and to protect society. Suppose liability insurance was entirely voluntary and not required by law. Would you get it? I'll bet you that most people with good income or significant assets would still buy it, just like people buy home or fire insurance even when not mandatory.

zeveb 10y ago

> with a contingency that a divorce would occur amicably (the second-most common case). Is that the second-most-common case? I haven't seen a single amicable divorce amongst my friends and colleagues. The level of nastiness has been different, of course, but it's never been amicable. Given the profound downsides that I've seen, I think that a prenuptial agreement is mandatory for anyone who chooses to marry in our era. Otherwise you're just going for the standard 'prenup' — and like the standard deduction on your taxes, it just ain't sufficient.

linkregister 10y ago
Dammit. While researching for some hard stats on this, I performed several Google searches containing the keywords "California divorce". Now I'm already getting divorce ads. Which my spouse might see. Better explain this one now before it becomes self-fulfilling ;) !
- poikniok 10y ago
  Another great reason to have an ad blocker.
- coredog64 10y ago
  That's what incognito mode is for. My cellphone provider is Cricket Wireless, and just leaving out the ".com" had Google showing me cards for cricket games for weeks on my Android. Now I only ever visit Cricket's website in incognito mode.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    Ads could be targeted by IP.
- sbov 10y ago
  Can you clear it on this page? I've used it before to clear out "temporary" interests. https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated
- 10y ago

JustSomeNobody 10y ago

> find the right spouse and work on your marriage and you won't have to worry about this issue Because, unfortunately, it is way too easy to give up on a marriage[0] instead of trying to work it out. Marriage takes effort. [0] Preemptively, because surely someone will reply about it: If a spouse is getting beat, they aren't giving up on their marriage if they leave; they're protecting their life.

alexssung 10y ago

Uhh considering how divorce rates are near 50%, your assumption of divorces occurring amicably as a second-most common case would heavily depend on what portion of that 40-50% _does_ actually end in a friendly manner. Let's be extremely optimistic and say 80% of divorces occur amicably.. that would give us ~10% odds of a nasty divorce--which I would not chalk up to "outliers"

ryuker16 10y ago
divorce rates among upper income, educated folks is low. . . closer to 10-20% range. . . and to be fair some matches are just plain bad or green card marriages.
- alexssung 10y ago
  That wasn't the point of my post. My point was that, no matter how you fudge the numbers, it's impossible to chalk up bad divorces as outliers. Outliers are defined as 3 standard deviations from the mean in a normal distribution, so the parent was implying that bad divorces occur at a rate of 0.1% or less--which is off by at least one order of magnitude.
  - kevinnk 10y ago
    > Outliers are defined as 3 standard deviations from the mean in a normal distribution I kind of agree with your overall point, but that definition is wildly incorrect.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dboreham 10y ago
  Hey there, my green card marriage is coming up on 18 years strong..
camiller 10y ago
that 50% thing is not really true any more. http://bestdivorcelawyer.co/family-law/divorce-rates-higherincome-lowerincome-families/6886/ http://bestdivorcelawyer.co/family-law/divorce-rates-higheri...

cwmoo740 10y ago

You're sorely wrong. Divorces in several states, California included, are like mutually assured destruction with one side having twice the firepower, and everything about a relationship can change in a divorce. To OP: you don't have to hide your assets in offshore accounts, you can talk to an estate planner and look into setting up a trust (google domestic asset protection trust) and make yourself the sole beneficiary. You would no longer "own" the money and it's protected in a divorce. Also prenups are typically worthless in the madness that is family court. Never ever ever rely on one.

sean_patel 10y ago
> you can talk to an estate planner and look into setting up a trust (google domestic asset protection trust) and make yourself the sole beneficiary. You would no longer "own" the money and it's protected in a divorce. Thank you for this real and actionable advice. I found this article, and according to it, California does not allow it. I guess I'll have to move to 1 of those state? Not too bad lol. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2016/07/06/comparing-domestic-asset-protection-trust-states/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2016/07/06/compari...
mysterypie 10y ago
> Also prenups are typically worthless in the madness that is family court. Never ever ever rely on one. Are you saying that prenups are worthless in the case of child support or that prenups are worthless in all cases? In the case of child-related issues, you're right. However, in the case of dividing assets, I think you might be mistaken. I've read stories of super wealthy people with prenups who did not get screwed; i.e., the prenup held up. The best example I can find is a certain billionaire who got divorced, but I cannot mention his name without creating irrevelant political discussion. He had an ironclad prenup and it held. That's the point I want to make. Prenups still work.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- xenihn 10y ago

mahyarm 10y ago

You shouldn't wear a seat belt or a helmet, you should make sure your skills are the best and you should really choose the best bike! Shit happens, thats why we have audits, contracts and airbags and why many people avoid driving motorcycles vs. cars. There is stuff outside of our control and to get rid of unnecessary risk is a benefit in itself.

avn2109 10y ago

>> "...horror stories of abusive alimony decrees..." [0] is IMHO a fairly evenhanded (and comprehensive) treatment of divorce outcomes by state, partially written by an MIT CompSci professor. It was an eye opener, and I wouldn't call it a men's rights website. [0] http://www.realworlddivorce.com/ http://www.realworlddivorce.com/