|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:21 pm Post subject: Men become richer after divorce |
 |
|
Contrary to popular myth, Men become richer after divorce in most cases.
| Quote: |
Divorce makes men - and particularly fathers - significantly richer. When a father separates from the mother of his children, according to new research, his available income increases by around one third. Women, in contrast, suffer severe financial penalties. Regardless of whether she has children, the average woman's income falls by more than a fifth and remains low for many years.
The research was carried out by Professor Stephen Jenkins, a director of the Institute for Social and Economic Research and chair of the Council of the International Association for Research on Income and Wealth.
His survey, Marital Splits and Income Changes over the Longer Term, is the first to track the changing wealth levels in Britain associated with a marriage breakdown. The findings have been welcomed by specialist family lawyers, including Resolution and Family Law in Partnership (Flip).
"The general belief that men get fleeced by their divorces while women get richer and live off the proceeds has long been due for exposure as a pernicious myth," said Ruth Smallacombe, a family consultant at Flip. "In reality, women often suffer economic hardship when they divorce. In addition, the resentment caused by unfair financial settlements has many knock-on effects, damaging ongoing relationships with former spouses and a woman's ability to move on with her life."
Jenkins's research found that the incomes of "separating husbands" rise "immediately and continuously" in the years following a marital split. "The differences between the sexes are stark," he said. "But this is not so much a gender thing as a parent thing. The key differences are not between men and women, but between fathers and mothers."
He found that, when a man leaves a childless marriage, his income immediately rises by 25%. Women, however, suffer a sharp fall in income. Their financial position rarely reaches pre-split levels.
Jenkins combined data from 14 different British Household Panel Surveys over 1991 to 2004 with the findings from five European surveys. Recalculating the results using the formula by which the government measures poverty, he established new per capita incomes. Jenkins found that the positive effect on men's finances is so significant that divorce can even lift them out of poverty, while women are far more likely to be plunged into destitution. Separated women have a poverty rate of 27% - almost three times that of their former husbands.
Maintenance paid by former partners also has little impact, said Jenkins, as just 31% of separated mothers receive payment from the father of their children.
"There are only two factors that have an impact on women's financial position, post relationship breakdown," said Jenkins. "The percentage change in income is less if they have worked beforehand and continue working afterwards. The impact is also reduced if they start working after the relationship breakdown. There is also a potential positive impact if she remarries," he added, "although the impact is a small one."
The position can be reversed if a separated man has more children with a new partner while paying maintenance to his first family. The only way to level the playing field is to make men and women more alike in terms of roles in the family and in the labour market. "Until these fundamental issues change, these realities will remain essentially unchanged," he said. |
If you find it's an interesting article - click on the link above to read the rest of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't conflate income with wealth, Big_Bird.
You get divorced, your wealth is cut in half almost immediately. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In California? I think it depends on where the man finds himself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's a British study. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Does British family law have "community property?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Women need to be mindful of the extent to which they financially depend on their partners. As I've said to Big Bird before, a woman who uses her labour force participation break (leaving work to have kids) will have a decreased income upon return (and never make up the difference) unless she peruses an education during that break (or some other time). And anyways, the husband can be killed crossing the street etc, in which case a woman can also be thrust into permanent poverty. Women need to get their education and careers right, before they have kids. Alimony, child payments etc won't make up a wide earnings gap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| men throw themselves into their work when their relationships go to pot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apples to Oranges!
1. Income? Great, income goes up 25%. Meanwhile, paying support payments to the wife should about wipe that out.
2. Add-on child support payments? Now you're behind.
3. What about lessons and other expenses?
4. What about child support payments not being tax deductable?
5. What about that the wife got the house?
This article also doesn't consider time of marriage. The longer in, the more the wife will benefit, especially with kids. The system as it stands clearly is slanted towards women. Now, if women have trouble finding work (or dont want to work) that is hardly the fault of the system, now is it? Or should the government provide special priviledges to women who find themselves divorced, like Affirmative Action for divorcees? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michaelambling
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Location: Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Does British family law have "community property?" |
British law doesn't recognize pre-nups and dividing property in half is the de facto standard, very commonly followed.
Britain is a bad place to be a man.
Wow this study is idiotic. Since every relationship is different, how can one begin to compare one divorce to another? In my divorce my wife is 29 and I'm 28; when we broke up, she was making �3000 p.a. more than me, and neither of our salaries increased or decreased when we divorced. About 3 months afterwards, she got a �2400 raise; about 4 months after that, I got a �800 raise.
Still, who cares? Our raises had nothing to do with the breakup, and our situation doesn't have a damn thing to do with anyone else. Should the government make me pay my ex-wife because some other woman is earning less money after her husband left her? What exactly is the point of this study?
"In reality, women often suffer economic hardship when they divorce." What a worthless, pointless generalization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michaelambling
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Location: Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| The system as it stands clearly is slanted towards women. Now, if women have trouble finding work (or dont want to work) that is hardly the fault of the system, now is it? Or should the government provide special priviledges to women who find themselves divorced, like Affirmative Action for divorcees? |
I couldn't agree with you more. This is why I am so incredibly fed up with the western world. There are simply too many institutions that are actively antagonistic towards men--and why? I didn't do anything!
I'm going to quote Henry Rollins right about now:
You say we're all the same
You don't even know my name
Sometime somewhere some man hurt you
I'm one of them so I get stuck with the blame
You think you know about me
You don't know a damn thing about me
I'm not all men, just one man, I'm not all men
There's one subject that everyone enjoys
I heard the boys talk the talk to the boys
I heard the girls talk the talk to the girls
It's all the same noise, neither one's worse
I didn't always tell the truth
But then again, neither did you
I'm not all men
I'm just one man
I'm not that man
I'm not all men
Get away and leave me well alone
Take your damage and take it back on home
I'm not the blame for your misery
Take your threats away from me
Take that damage and leave me all alone
I won't try to patronize you
And tell you that I know exactly what you've been through
You know it just might be
That you have no problem with me
I'm not a rapist in waiting
I'm not the one you should be hating
You take your fear and you pull it inside
It builds up and rage starts to rise
You turn it loose and your anger is blind
And you see me as the enemy
That's not the way it ought to be
You generalize and tell me lies
Like all I want's between you thighs
All the things that I put you through
And all the things that I might do
Don't wonder when I run away
When you tell me it's my time to pay
For all the tears and all the pain
For all the terrible things I never did |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Women need to be mindful of the extent to which they financially depend on their partners. As I've said to Big Bird before, a woman who uses her labour force participation break (leaving work to have kids) will have a decreased income upon return (and never make up the difference) unless she peruses an education during that break (or some other time). And anyways, the husband can be killed crossing the street etc, in which case a woman can also be thrust into permanent poverty. Women need to get their education and careers right, before they have kids. Alimony, child payments etc won't make up a wide earnings gap. |
This seems sensible, but the problem with it is that by the time many women are in this position, their fertility is declining. Lots of women have gone this route and found they've missed the boat.
In some ways it might even be better to get your kids out of the way very young. That way, you could have the youngest in school while you were still in your mid-twenties and then start your career with less interuptions.
I sometimes wonder if society needs a whole different approach to children. We weren't evolved in nuclear families, and coping as just a team of 2 parents is difficult enough (unless you can afford an au pair and/or have grandparents around fit and well or eager enough to provide support), nevermind bringing up kids as a single parent. They say it takes a village to raise a child and there's something to that. Once upon a time there would have been a tribe or extended family behind the parents. Perhaps society needs to find a way to act like one big tribe again, and make it less of a burden for individuals. Then again, we don't want to make it too attractive, or we'll populate ourselves to death! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| This article also doesn't consider time of marriage. The longer in, the more the wife will benefit, especially with kids. The system as it stands clearly is slanted towards women. Now, if women have trouble finding work (or dont want to work) that is hardly the fault of the system, now is it? Or should the government provide special priviledges to women who find themselves divorced, like Affirmative Action for divorcees? |
I think this is very ignorant. When you've spent a year as a single parent, please come back and tell us how fabulous it was. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| This article also doesn't consider time of marriage. The longer in, the more the wife will benefit, especially with kids. The system as it stands clearly is slanted towards women. Now, if women have trouble finding work (or dont want to work) that is hardly the fault of the system, now is it? Or should the government provide special priviledges to women who find themselves divorced, like Affirmative Action for divorcees? |
I think this is very ignorant. When you've spent a year as a single parent, please come back and tell us how fabulous it was. |
I have! I had a child out of wedlock. Guess what? I had to pay child support, but was given NO CUSTODIAL RIGHTS! The mom got to have full custody, child support, and got money from the government. I also am responsible for paying half of all lessons, and am expected to pay for post-secondary. All that, and I get to visit my child only when the mom allows me to. So I'm a parent in sperm and money only, no rights.
What a fucking joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mzeno
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In the US, I think it's pretty much a proven fact that a man's standard of living increases after a divorce, and the woman's standard of living decreases, generally speaking. Don't ask me to explain it, but that's my understanding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mzeno wrote: |
| In the US, I think it's pretty much a proven fact that a man's standard of living increases after a divorce, and the woman's standard of living decreases, generally speaking. Don't ask me to explain it, but that's my understanding. |
It's called income. Women don't make as much as men. Why? Many reasons.
The fundamental point though, is who gets screwed in a divorce/split, in terms of assets and children. Answer: men.
If you argue that point, I would call you ridiculous. Just ask yourself the last time you heard a woman say "I got screwed in my divorce" versus the last time you heard a man say that. Women get alimony, men don't. Women get child support, men don't. Women get the house, men don't. Alimony ends when the women gets remarried. Meaning, it can go on FOREVER.
This isn't rocket science folks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
