Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone who thinks paying a Hooker for sex is expensive should try getting free sex from a wife.
What's the difference between prostitution and alimony?
Prostitution: Man pays and gets the sex.
Alimony: Man still pays but some one else gets the sex.
Alimony is tax deductable to the giver and taxable on the receiver. So, if a man pays alimony he gets it as a tax deduction, whereas he wouldn't by staying married, she would have to pay taxes on it as income. SURPRISE!
Oh heaven forbid the money you receive for free living expenses is considered income just because it is income. Do you really think anyone would rather be the one paying out alimony as opposed to the one receiving it?
It's not like you DESERVE someone else's money for marrying them, how stupid.
Did the typical husband DESERVE having his gross socks washed for him (and every other piece of his laundry that, during marriage to the "at-home" woman, he never had to think about), his dishes washed, his food cooked, HIS careless **** washed off the outside of the bowl, his children brought back and forth to school and to doctor's appointments and their homework overseen and their school and scout projects labored over, her income in addition to all this (frequently...many couples are two-income), his Christmas cards written out for him, his phone conversations with Mom pawned off on the wife, his children carried for him, etc. "for marrying him"?
Yet he got it. For years, usually. (Yeah, yeah, you "help." NEARLY half the amount as the woman helps, and that's only if you BOTH work outside the home. (Wowsers, how awesome of you! You men expect women to work the same hours as you, plus only do double the housework? What's all that about people being unnecessarily deserving again?) If she's at home, it's 20% or less.) And by the way, that's including the 7 extra hours per week that you, exclusively, create for her simply by slipping that deserving ring on your finger. (rolleyes)
"The woman gets all that money...and she never had to work!" Never had to work??? WTF??? In a huge percentage of families, the woman not only works AS hard (but for way less money) outside the home, she ALSO works unpaid an enormous percentage of the time once she's dragged herself home from said job. And for stay-at-home moms, forget it. Zero respect, 99% of the work (that's my estimate, BTW, a little overblown; the other percentages are facts and are linked).
Yes, it's very true that women often earn less money. It's also a fact, supported by data, that women work harder...no matter how much money they make. Where's that "it's unfair" whiny whimpery emoticon again?
Oh heaven forbid the money you receive for free living expenses is considered income just because it is income. Do you really think anyone would rather be the one paying out alimony as opposed to the one receiving it?
I'm simply stating something a lot of people do not know and that is all the complaining about paying alimony - it's not like there isn't a benefit of it being a tax deduction. If you stay married and continue 'supporting' your communal lifestyle that money is not tax deductible. So, it's not like there aren't some benefits allocated to the giver in these situation. The information doesn't seem to be common knowledge however. Should the receiver stay married they would not incur this tax payable burden. So, in a way, everyone gets screwed one way or another.
I'm simply stating something a lot of people do not know and that is all the complaining about paying alimony - it's not like there isn't a benefit of it being a tax deduction. If you stay married and continue 'supporting' your communal lifestyle that money is not tax deductible. So, it's not like there aren't some benefits allocated to the giver in these situation. The information doesn't seem to be common knowledge however. Should the receiver stay married they would not incur this tax payable burden. So, in a way, everyone gets screwed one way or another.
Reminds me on a smaller scale of someone saying lotto winners get taxed a lot...still better than being the one with the lost dollar.
Reminds me on a smaller scale of someone saying lotto winners get taxed a lot...still better than being the one with the lost dollar.
If I were receiving alimony I'd fully expect to pay taxes on it. It's income.I have to go back and read -- was someone complaining about this? It's common sense. Even when you're literally handed a gift, if it's over a certain amount you're supposed to claim it, correct?
In any event, I know a lot of divorced people and I know a lot of people who are currently receiving alimony and not one of them has ever complained about being taxed for it, but perhaps we run in different kinds of groups.
Yes but when they set up alimony, they do so with the realization that it is taxable for the reciever.
Therefore, if I got divorced and the court figured that the amount I needed to sustain a reasonable standard of living was $1000 a month, the court would add on the taxes to that....so they'd up it to approx $1400 or $1500 a month. That extra money would account for the taxes I'd have to pay on it at the end of the year.
So the receiver isn't really getting screwed by having to pay taxes on alimony...it's all figured into the fee. At least here in NC that's the way it's done.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.