pettyofficerj
New Member
even Lamaar 'Durrr' Odom is laughing his ass off at this shit
Elin Woods gets 750 Million
- Thread starter Raul Sinclair
- Start date
even Lamaar 'Durrr' Odom is laughing his ass off at this shit
She is not getting that much money.
http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/30/tiger...rce-property-settlement-millions-judge-final/
http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/30/tiger...rce-property-settlement-millions-judge-final/
THAT mentality makes women look pathetic and weak. The ex husband shouldnt provide a penny to his ex wife. And lmao at your comparison. Are you calling the husband "the boss"?bwhahaha
Man, kudos to Elin, she is a flat out saint!!!!!! What a strong independent women
You are intentionally misrepresenting my position. I have repeatedly said that Elin does not deserve this settlement, or anything close to it.
My entire suggestion was that it would be reasonable to provide a spouse with a minimal amount of support for a minimal amount of time if said spouse had NO MEANS of their own. That's what I meant by "leaving them hanging". I'm not saying alimony is right in the majority of cases. In almost every case, it is not. But. If a person is laying up under someone with no income of their own, they are in fact pathetic and weak at that point, and yes if your whole income is your husband, he is your boss. If someone has no money at all and you just up and throw them out of the house with nothing, that's a bit harsh.
LaydeezmanCris
New Member
I'm sorry, but no amount of emotional strain entitles you to 3/4 of a person's life earnings. Just my .2 cents.
lmao I bet the feminist on here are gonna love that remark.
Not that TMZ is reliable but now she's at 100 million according to the press. We probably will never really hear what the settlement was.TMZ has learned ... Elin Nordegren will walk away from her marriage with Tiger Woods with approximately $100 million.
As one source with direct knowledge of the terms of the divorce tells TMZ, "She'll be getting close to $100,000,000."
There have been reports Elin would score $750 million, but we have confirmed that figure is wrong. Indeed, as we first reported, Tiger is not even worth $750 million. We're told his net worth is somewhere between $500 and $600 million.
Sources say Elin will receive child support, but we do not know the specific amount.
As for the $100 million figure ... this is not speculation ... it comes from sources with direct knowledge of the property settlement agreement.
To put this in some perspective, Elin will be getting 10 times what Rachel Uchitel scored from Tiger.
Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2010/07/02/elin-...nt-100-million-dollars-divorce/#ixzz0sYK6W0Xr
Also, I noticed you keep saying the word "spouse". Thats incorrect. It should be EX-spouse. I do agree that a man should give her ex wife some money though, say maybe $5 bucks
TMZ has learned ... Elin Nordegren will walk away from her marriage with Tiger Woods with approximately $100 million.
As one source with direct knowledge of the terms of the divorce tells TMZ, "She'll be getting close to $100,000,000."
There have been reports Elin would score $750 million, but we have confirmed that figure is wrong. Indeed, as we first reported, Tiger is not even worth $750 million. We're told his net worth is somewhere between $500 and $600 million.
Sources say Elin will receive child support, but we do not know the specific amount.
As for the $100 million figure ... this is not speculation ... it comes from sources with direct knowledge of the property settlement agreement.
To put this in some perspective, Elin will be getting 10 times what Rachel Uchitel scored from Tiger.
Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2010/07/02/elin-...nt-100-million-dollars-divorce/#ixzz0sYK6W0Xr
Well that's a heck of a lot better than 750 million, but still way too much IMO.
I am a feminist.
Also, I noticed you keep saying the word "spouse". Thats incorrect. It should be EX-spouse. I do agree that a man should give her ex wife some money though, say maybe $5 bucks
My Mom got a little alimony when my parents divorced (I was 3). Just enough for her to keep the utilities on until she could find a job. I don't think that's unreasonable. I think nowadays alimony is pretty well misused, however, so I would support eliminating alimony as a legal concept. Still, I think morally that if one person has money and the other doesn't, under most situations you should try to help that person get onto their feet. You love a person enough to marry them, you have some moral obligation to not want to see them homeless. People shouldn't treat each other that way, in most circumstances. Sometimes people break up after horrible mistreatment, but most of the time things just don't work out. In those cases, I think the ethical thing to do is to try and give them a little help to get started.
Agreed.
The Dark King
Well-Known Member
You know 100 million is a lot more easier to handle mentally. And it wasn't so much the sum but the idea that sympathy and tears are worth 3/4 of a mans career earnings. I agree that infidelity isn't cool but someones hurt feelings shouldn't trump somenes hard work.
But what if the wife is a huge bi-polar biatch. And the husband doesnt want anything to do with her anymore?
Also, what if its the wife that wants the divorce cause she fell in love with another guy? Still think the husband should help her out?
Hmm you must be one of those new wave feminists that are full of contridictions.
So if a wife is a homemaker (stay out home mom), her husband is "her boss"? Since he is "her boss", I suppose as a boss he is allowed to order her around to do things and call ALL the shots? I mean thats what bosses do right? If you have that outlook on things and think its perfectly fine then you are one crappy feminist
I just said that there are such exceptions. Most divorces involve neither bipolar biatches or new lovers. If the couple is divorcing simply because they don't work together anymore, or because they're just going in different directions, I think there are certain moral obligations they both have to each other. If there is justifiable reason why one should feel they don't owe their ex a thing, obviously those obligations would not apply.
The Dark King
Well-Known Member
Hmm you must be one of those new wave feminists that are full of contridictions.
So if a wife is a homemaker (stay out home mom), her husband is "her boss"? Since he is "her boss", I suppose as a boss he is allowed to order her around to do things and call ALL the shots? I mean thats what bosses do right? If you have that outlook on things and think its perfectly fine then you are one crappy feminist
Dude you're attacking someone who isn't even coming at you. Chi is the biggest bleeding heart liberal ever. Trust me she's down with womens rights.
Definitely not trying to "attack" her. Hope she didnt take it that way. I just joke around on here so I hope folks on here realize I am usually being lighthearted and have no intentions of offending anyone.
Its just that her remark that if the husband being the main source of income is "her boss" seemed kinda odd to say especially from a self proclaimed feminist.
Ha. No.
The earliest feminist movements were to get homemmaker considered a real job. In fact, early plans were to convince bosses to pay wives along with their male employees. The theory was that a good wife made a better employee, so the boss should pay them too. There were also efforts to have Men pay Women salaries.
Nowadays, a Woman has the opportunity to make her own living. But, if she prefers to keep house for her husband in exchange for financial support, she is in fact working for him. Admitting that allows one to look at what she does in a day as a real job, deserving of respect comparable to other jobs, which was historically one of the first goals of the feminist movement.
So if a wife is a homemaker (stay out home mom), her husband is "her boss"? Since he is "her boss", I suppose as a boss he is allowed to order her around to do things and call ALL the shots? I mean thats what bosses do right? If you have that outlook on things and think its perfectly fine then you are one crappy feminist
Obviously there are good bosses and bad bosses. A good boss will seek out the opinion of his employees and make them feel respected in the workplace. A good boss will not motivate his employees to strike or be disgruntled.
But if your husband is earning all the money, he has a right to the final say on how it is spent. If he does this badly, she's made a bad decision about who she would allow to support her financially.
As a feminist, I want equal rights, and I also believe in equal responsibilities.