California Ballot Initiative to Outlaw ALL Alimony - This guy is going for the jugular.

DIDNT_READ_YOUR_SHIT · 2015-05-09T18:28:50+00:00

In the end, the judge ordered that since my daughter’s child support was coming to an end (because she was turning 18 that month) that my permanent spousal support (alimony) payment be increased from $800 to $1000 per month for the rest of her life or until she remarries.

**DO NOT. FUCKING. GET. MARRIED. **

dr_warlock · 2015-05-08T22:46:51+00:00

Steve Clark (leader of petition) divorce rape account (Source)

I mentioned to my wife about filing our own documents and splitting our assets in half. However, my wife mentioned “What about alimony?” I responded, “With you making good money as a dental hygienist why do you feel you need alimony?” She replied “because I gave you 24 years of my life” And I didn’t give her 24 years of my life?

Entitlement at its finest. This is why women shouldn't vote. Having a roof over their head, clothes on their back, and food on the table is not considered enough. She expects more after her 'hard work' as a ~~wife~~ maid and nanny.

The judge was also presented with a printout from the California Employment Development Department showing that in the state of California the median income for a dental hygienist is approximately $100,000 per year. The judge dismissed this evidence as lacking foundation and ultimately said he could only accept this type of evidence from an expert witness.

In the end, the judge ordered that since my daughter’s child support was coming to an end (because she was turning 18 that month) that my permanent spousal support (alimony) payment be increased from $800 to $1000 per month for the rest of her life or until she remarries.

Why???

As you can see, Steve had proof from a state government website that his ex-wife didn't need alimony seeing she was making 100k/year at her current occupation. The judge made up the bullshit excuse about needing an 'expert witness' which would require more court time (money for lawyers) when all he had to do was seize her bank records which they seem so found of for 'dead beat' dads or you know... Check the site himself?

The titles, 'child support' and 'alimony', are a distinction without a difference. There isn't a requirement to prove that child support is being used to support the child (Source). It's the same thing as giving the ex-wife money (alimony) and saying she can use it for the child if she wants.

SleepNowMyThrowaway · 2015-05-09T00:39:06+00:00

God bless him!

No matter if it passes, the crazed shrieking of the opposition will turn many more men into red pill foot soldiers; count on it.

putsch80 · 2015-05-08T23:51:03+00:00

At this point, all he has done is obtain approval to collect signatures to get this measure on the ballot. He has to get over 360,000 signatures before it will actually appear on a ballot in an election. You don't get that number of signatures with a few friends going door-to-door or setting up a table outside of a few Kroger's. Unless he is well-heeled in order to hire an army of canvassers, or has a very active grassroots network, don't expect this to end up on the ballot.

And even if it ends up on the ballot, it would take a majority of voters to pass it. With a large portion of the electorate being women, and another large portion being male BP/SJWs, this has about a snowball's chance in hell of ever becoming law.

Neat idea, but it's DOA.

NeoreactionSafe · 2015-05-09T00:31:27+00:00

It makes sense to attempt this.

There would still be child support which can be adjusted based on the income of the ex-husband.

If nothing else it streamlines the divorce process.

No women will vote for this... so it's probably not going to pass.

wtf_hell · 2015-05-09T13:43:56+00:00

My thought is this: I generally think alimony is bullshit, but let's face it, it will never go away without a radical change. So a better solution might be to slowly chip away at the "qualifications" for alimony.

Principles:

END. NO. FAULT. DIVORCE. Marriage is a serious choice to enjoin your life with another person for what's supposed to be a lifetime. Make it harder to get out of and people might rethink getting married on a whim.

No "lifetime" alimony, it's supposed to be temporary to allow the lesser income having spouse to get settled.

Terms:

Scrap "qualifications", make it upon request. Someone should have to request alimony, it should not be considered an automatic grant. Also, separate alimony hearings from divorce proceedings.

Length of marriage:

Set a minimum, say 10 years. That way, there is no "quick money" to be had, and it gets the couple past the first few rocky years when most divorces occur, and then also past the '7 year itch'.

Income disparity:

What type of work has the spouse requesting the alimony done in the past? What type are they doing now? Did they get a lower paying job purposefully? That last question is to determine whether or not the spouse is capable of getting an income that is sufficient for their needs. Make bank records monitored. Opening too many lines of credit? Alimony gone. Making needless purchases? Alimony gone. Consistently have a surplus in checking? Alimony gone. Compare all bank records with paychecks; no hiding money.

Children:

How many children are there? What do the couple's bank records say about how much it costs to raise them?

Require joint custody that way neither parent can claim child support, which could open the door for additional alimony payments.

Lifestyle:

This one is simple. Have an independent accountant go through the bank records to determine what the actual cost of living should be for each spouse. Make it rigid. Do not allow for "designer"/"luxury" anything: clothing, vacations, salon visits, gym memberships.. I mean fucking anything that is not utterly critical to existence.

Finally:

Make the spouse requesting alimony pay half of the costs for the independent accountant and additional court hearings for alimony.

It sounds rigid, yes, but perhaps making this a burdensome process will disincline spouses from automatically fighting for alimony when they don't actually need it. Or at least they might settle for less.

Maybe I'm too extreme, but I've seen too many male friends have to pay alimony to cheating spouses for bullshit reasons, even though the marriages were very short (less than 2 years).

juliusstreicher · 2015-05-09T03:14:24+00:00

This guy is my new hero. Why did this take so long?

scarletspider3 · 2015-05-09T02:59:37+00:00

I'm sure all the 'strong independent women' won't have a problem with this.

Stephen_Reeves · 2015-05-09T07:59:27+00:00

I don't know why people keep parroting "it will never get passed". This could very realistically get passed without any issue.

The bigger issue is weather the courts would just shuffle the cards and transfer that lost wealth over to child support payments. Any law against dissolving alimony would have to address the issue. Really there's almost no difference between alimony and child support anyways so we all know it would happen.

puppy2010 · 2015-05-09T11:53:03+00:00

This already happens in Australia. Alimony (or as it's known here, spousal maintenance) only lasts for a set period, the most is usually about 2 years, and men and women can apply for it.

95wave · 2015-05-08T22:51:34+00:00

I'd recommend posting this to /r/mensrights, thats more their area of knowledge.

ChadThundercockII · 2015-05-09T11:21:49+00:00

The good thing about this is that he doesn't mention entitlement or privilege. So Feminists cannot pry on it.

Surf_Or_Die · 2015-05-09T01:35:42+00:00

It's never gonna pass but I'll vote for it if I can.

SilentForTooLong · 2015-05-09T10:15:25+00:00

Cool that this guy is from my home town!

Makes more sense there...so much marriage there...

GuruDev1000 · 2015-05-09T14:09:40+00:00

When men were in power, they gave women rights when women asked for it. That shows

1) men are humane and/or

2) if you fight for it, you can get it

That means, it shouldn't matter to men if women are the majority voters. Either women prove that they are human enough to support something rational and fair, or men fight for it.

Ovadox · 2015-05-09T14:24:36+00:00

Stories like this underscore the importance of participating in the political process by voting, writing to representatives and donating time or money to organizations that fight against the feminine imperative sex strategy that was foolishly written into law. There is no such thing as inalienable rights. You have only the rights you are willing to assert for yourself, so get out there and fight like men.

plentyoffishes · 2015-05-09T15:55:12+00:00

Just avoid marriage altogether and your life will likely be more peaceful and happy.

Doctor_Mayhem · 2015-05-09T22:33:05+00:00

One thing I like about certain southern states: North Carolina is a No Alimony state, Texas is a conditional alimony state (only when abuse, neglect, or adultery is concerned). If you're religious and must get married, avoid Florida or any granola states.

armenia4ever · 2015-05-09T05:44:49+00:00

Don't pay alimony.

Id rather go to jail - I'm dead serious - then pay alimony.

If enough men do this, the system will crash.

[deleted] · 2015-05-09T02:51:22+00:00

How is it that Christians say it? May God have mercy on his soul? THIS is forward-thinking not that neo-feminazi bullshit.

dandar4600 · 2015-05-09T13:12:13+00:00

Laws like this have been already passed on state levels. See Massachusetts. Alimony limited to 10 years tops and usually less with orders for receiving party to get training for employment. If there is enough support for it and with politicians being mostly rich males it actually has a good chance of passing.

[deleted] · 2015-05-11T18:14:41+00:00

Woah woah woah. Is it just me or was this article heavily edited since it was uploaded? If I'm correct, does anyone have the original version?

87GNX · 2015-05-11T19:19:23+00:00

BUD LIGHT presents. REAL, AMERICAN HEROES.

derper-man · 2015-05-09T01:03:34+00:00

No alimony at all seems a bit unfair. If a man divorces a woman who gave up her career to be a stay at home mom then there would be no reassurances for women that marriage would be a benefit, and families would suffer. I think something more reasonable would look like:

No alimony unless:

You are not the partner bringing the divorce.
A partner left the workforce in order to raise children for more than 6 months, or more time than their employer was willing to offer paternal leave.
A partner sacrificed a career position in order to move to a job in another area for the other partner. (for example a guys wife gets 6 figure job in California, so he leaves his own job in new York in order to move with her.)

Title	California Ballot Initiative to Outlaw ALL Alimony - This guy is going for the jugular.
Author	eaton80
Upvotes	605
Comments	147
Date	May 8, 2015 9:41 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/35c2ki/california_ballot_initiative_to_outlaw_all/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/california-ballot-initiative-to-outlaw-all-alimony.227262 https://theredarchive.com/post/227262

Comments