Search Results
7/18/2025, 1:51:13 PM
Ctrl+f community property
Zero results
Anything you have before marriage is typically yours regardless of which state you live in. In community property states, things acquired after marriage are considered to be owned by both partners regardless of who actually paid or whose name is on the title. The unfair practice in community property states is an equitable 50/50 split regardless of income. The argument is that someone making less contributes in other ways. Somehow Jeff Bezo’s wife’s contribution to their marriage was worth billions.
Equitable splits are still a step in the right direction though, because it codifies into law how assets (and debts) are divided in a divorce. It’s not a completely fair system, but those laws were put into place because divorce was becoming comically unfair, with unemployed housewives reviving literally everything and causing men to file bankruptcy and have to start their financial lives over at middle age.
Other states leave it up to the judges discretion. A woman earning 30% of what her husband makes could be given the entire value of their house while both contributed equally to the marriage (because they both worked full time). Or the former scenario of the unemployed housewife “getting everything in the divorce.” It’s pretty fucked.
The “new” Chinese law (5 months old, at least) is simply pragmatic, taking into account actual financial contributions when it comes to financial division.
>what’s “/pol/“?
>a place to discuss Chinese divorce law
Zero results
Anything you have before marriage is typically yours regardless of which state you live in. In community property states, things acquired after marriage are considered to be owned by both partners regardless of who actually paid or whose name is on the title. The unfair practice in community property states is an equitable 50/50 split regardless of income. The argument is that someone making less contributes in other ways. Somehow Jeff Bezo’s wife’s contribution to their marriage was worth billions.
Equitable splits are still a step in the right direction though, because it codifies into law how assets (and debts) are divided in a divorce. It’s not a completely fair system, but those laws were put into place because divorce was becoming comically unfair, with unemployed housewives reviving literally everything and causing men to file bankruptcy and have to start their financial lives over at middle age.
Other states leave it up to the judges discretion. A woman earning 30% of what her husband makes could be given the entire value of their house while both contributed equally to the marriage (because they both worked full time). Or the former scenario of the unemployed housewife “getting everything in the divorce.” It’s pretty fucked.
The “new” Chinese law (5 months old, at least) is simply pragmatic, taking into account actual financial contributions when it comes to financial division.
>what’s “/pol/“?
>a place to discuss Chinese divorce law
7/17/2025, 3:51:58 PM
>>510625769
And what does it say about Asians if Western losers are insta-Chads the moment they arrive? Imagine being Asian and being logged by the guys you describe. How fucking over would it be for an Asian living as a racial minority surrounded by Westerners?
And what does it say about Asians if Western losers are insta-Chads the moment they arrive? Imagine being Asian and being logged by the guys you describe. How fucking over would it be for an Asian living as a racial minority surrounded by Westerners?
Page 1