• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would divorce rates be lower if people didn't accumulate assets during marriage?

Sounds like you have a good relationship with your partner. That's what anyone should strive for.

If those kids don’t make it what chance does anyone have?
 
I think that if anything, joint assets incentivise couples to stay together.

One a side note, if you can't trust your husband or wife, then you either don't have a good marriage, or you are not cut out for marriage. Also, your retirement advice is terrible. If you don't invest heavily in your 401k, meaning 10% of your salary or more, you probably will not have sufficient savings for retirement.

I don’t think 401ks are community property either, they can’t be awarded in a divorce, now if you owe money and take distributions maybe but the account itself shouldn’t be divisible
 
I don’t think 401ks are community property either, they can’t be awarded in a divorce, now if you owe money and take distributions maybe but the account itself shouldn’t be divisible

I am not sure. When a friend of mine divorced his wife, she took the 401k and he took the house.
 
I think that if anything, joint assets incentivise couples to stay together.

One a side note, if you can't trust your husband or wife, then you either don't have a good marriage, or you are not cut out for marriage. Also, your retirement advice is terrible. If you don't invest heavily in your 401k, meaning 10% of your salary or more, you probably will not have sufficient savings for retirement.

He has a point, its his conclusions that are suspect.

IMO. This is my opinion not advice of any sort. If you get married while young with few assets then don't worry about splitting assets as most are going to be joint anyhow. Its those who marry later in life with significant assets accumulated that should consider documenting these in a prenuptial agreement, so that assets that were divided remain that way if this is desired. Prenuptial agreements in general are a good thing in my opinion as it forces people to be far more clinical and realistic in their expectations of marriage and provides a firmer foundation for those expectations. Prenuptials don't just cover financials they can cover pretty much anything. The other thing a prenuptial does is help clarify each others wants and needs, if they are honest, and brings about a better understanding of the person you are involved in. That is a good thing to have before committing to a life long commitment.
 
If American men were not limp-wristed and materialistic and embraced God instead of worshiping $, then divorce rates would be lower, and their wives would not seek out affairs with young men who resemble movie stars and pop idols.

This is why in Godly nations there is no divorce rate like in decadent nations where men are ungodly and cannot control their wives.

Marriage is a partnership, in good ones there are no senior partners or more to the point the "senior" partner switches back and forth depending on circumstance, need, and ability.
 
Back
Top Bottom