Here's my house for sale -- any suggestions? Thx

There are people who purport to be wealthy but are not...Big house, fancy cars.

Others look super poor, but are not.

Sam Walton and his Ford pickup. Steve Jobs and his modest home. Warren Buffett and his daily McDonald's run. One of the least know (in my area) was Julio Gallo. He was in charge of the grapes and the wineries. You would see him in overalls/jeans repairing wine tanks and valves...Looked like a day laborer.
 
Did some digging on Colorado equitable distribution...Law there for divorce.

I am just wondering how you will be treating your trading seminar business?? Is it highly successful?? Is it continuing to grow?? How much "good will" do you put in the value of the business??

Or will it be more like, "You know...I have to go to Vegas twice a year. Have to go to other trade shows I don't want to...Need to make a buck."

Do you/her down play it or up play it??

Does a 401k or IRAs come into play??

Your wife on the other hand, could start talking in broken English/Japanese to the judge. She is totally helpless without your income!! She couldn't even get a job as a Walmart checker...

All I know (and have heard), the less you get the attorneys involved, the more you come out better in the end. You may win the majority of the case, but your attorney bleeds you dry...
 
Cabin111 said:
Did some digging on Colorado equitable distribution...Law there for divorce.

I am just wondering how you will be treating your trading seminar business?? Is it highly successful?? Is it continuing to grow?? How much "good will" do you put in the value of the business??

Or will it be more like, "You know...I have to go to Vegas twice a year. Have to go to other trade shows I don't want to...Need to make a buck."

Do you/her down play it or up play it??

Does a 401k or IRAs come into play??

Your wife on the other hand, could start talking in broken English/Japanese to the judge. She is totally helpless without your income!! She couldn't even get a job as a Walmart checker...

All I know (and have heard), the less you get the attorneys involved, the more you come out better in the end. You may win the majority of the case, but your attorney bleeds you dry...
More...


upload_2023-8-16_16-5-19.jpeg
 
KCalhoun said:
Kids, Colorado is a no fault divorce state
More...
For those of us who have been through divorces in no-fault states, let me translate what he is saying.

In a no-fault sate, a Judge doesn't care who cheated on who, and who spent what on what during the marriage. It only boils down to two things:

  1. What assets must be equitably distributed between the two parties.
  2. What liabilities must be equitably distributed between the two parties.
That's it. In a no-fault state, the judge literally does not give a shit what caused the divorce. It's just a matter of distributing the good (assets) and the bad (liabilities) reasonably between the husband and wife. Erroneously, most wives think they are only going to get half of all the assets, but they don't realize they are also on the hook for their 50% portion of the marital debt as well.

Where things get complicated in a no-fault state is what assets each party brought into the marriage BEFORE they got married, because according to the law, what a person brings into the marriage is not subject to equitable distribution. So if you inherited 100 acres of property before you got married, that asset would not be subject to being split during a divorce proceeding. But that whole zone of what you had or what you were developing before you got married is where the grey area lies. Luckily for me, I started ET a week or two before I got married and therefore it was deemed as a non-marital asset in the eyes of the court. :D
 
Last edited:
Not to put too fine a point on this but it does matter.

Colorado is an "equitable distribution" state, not an equal distribution state.

It is also a no-fault state as others have stated. You don't have to prove that one party did this or that or did not do this or that. Simply wanting a divorce and filing for one is sufficient basis for the granting of the divorce without a finding of fault by either party.

In an equal distribution state the court must arrive at an equal dividing of assets, duh.

However, in an "equitable distribution" state, the judge has the authority to arrive at what he thinks is a fair deal based on all the factors and circumstances. One of the take home messages is that you don't want to piss off the judge or be an asshole or an undesirable or let it be known that the wife was poorly treated in any way if you can avoid it in an equitable distribution state because the judge has more power to sweeten the deal more for the woman if he thinks it is only fair to her based on her history and future needs. Whereas in an equal distribution state it is basically an accounting exercise. If you are complete asshole and were banging hookers everynight, you are still entitled to your half.

Ken, when you post pictures of your house, just double check to see that there are no blow up dolls over on the couch.

Lookin' out for you.
 
Baron said:
For those of us who have been through divorces in no-fault states, let me translate what he is saying.

In a no-fault sate, a Judge doesn't care who cheated on who, and who spent what on what during the marriage. It only boils down to two things:

  1. What assets must be equitably distributed between the two parties.
  2. What liabilities must be equitably distributed between the two parties.
That's it. In a no-fault state, the judge literally does not give a shit what caused the divorce. It's just a matter of distributing the good (assets) and the bad (liabilities) reasonably between the husband and wife. Erroneously, most wives think they are only going to get half of all the assets, but they don't realize they are also on the hook for their 50% portion of the marital debt as well.

Where things get complicated in a no-fault state is what assets each party brought into the marriage BEFORE they got married, because according to the law, what a person brings into the marriage is not subject to equitable distribution. So if you inherited 100 acres of property before you got married, that asset would not be subject to being split during a divorce proceeding. But that whole zone of what you had or what you were developing before you got married is where the grey area lies. Luckily for me, I started ET a week or two before I got married and therefore it was deemed as a non-marital asset in the eyes of the court. :D
More...

So is the $500. hooker in Vegas, on his credit card, a asset or a liability???
 
Cabin111 said:
So is the $500. hooker in Vegas, on his credit card, a asset or a liability???
More...
I can't speak for all guys, but I think that would be an emotional asset and a financial liability. :sneaky: And the extent of that just depends on how enjoyable the hooker was. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top