₦airaland Forum

MRbrownJAY: here is what you wrote since you seem to go through a bout of amnesia, lol:

Her contribution, I repeat, is not a determinant of his wealth. Without her contribution, he would still have made his wealth. On the other hand, without his parents contribution, he would probably be a nobody. He will end up like an almajiri. Yet the parents cannot dare ask for £21m, but you feel some gold-digger is entitled to it for enjoying his money with him. Is that fair?

dwell on that for a minute (or two), as it sure sounds to me that you are stating, AS A FACT, that anyone who has parental mentoring will generate wealth (aka a successful business).

I will comeback to address the error in this lame evidence. You will show me where in that statement I said "anyone mentored by their parents for 25years would automatically be successful in business".

In the mean time:

Tell me, from your understanding and intelligence, what has more influence on an individual: Their nurturing or their marriage.

When you finish answering that, tell me, which do you (from your capability of making assumptions) think will have more influence: The mentorship of parents over about 25 years from birth or an 11 year marriage of a man from his 30s.

I wait.

MRbrownJAY: ^^^^ bro, i made assumptions to make you understand and SEE that the opposite of what you wrote is POSSIBLE.
again, there is a 50-50% chance in this case that she may be entitled to every penny she was awarded (judged from the facts that we have)........if you cant see that then, pls, bring CONCRETE FACTS to the table for us to discuss or lets bow out of this discussion that simply goes nowhere.

you just keep on believing that she is a golddigga who deserves only 0.25% of the family wealth, while i believe that she deserve much more.

Answer the gaddamn question. Stop dodging it.

Tell me, from your understanding and intelligence, what has more influence on an individual: Their nurturing or their marriage.

When you finish answering that, tell me, which do you (from your capability of making assumptions) think will have more influence: The mentorship of parents over about 25 years from birth or an 11 year marriage of a man from his 30s.

I wait.

I am going to Paxman up this mudafcker because I know, you know, I know, you know, they know, I know, everyone knows, you know you are fcked that is why you are dodging answering it.

You can be as verbose as you want and keep on dodging. I will Paxman up the mudafcker!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk

MRbrownJAY: wait no longer......... lol........ who cares what has more influence on a man's life when it comes to the growth of a business? a man can be an uneducated orphan and still create the best business out there AND ALSO, a man could be educated at the best schools in the world (with all the parental mentoring whatsoever) and fail miserably in life. the fact that you believe that any person mentored by his parents for 25yrs, would automatically make him successful in business, is your first fail of the day.

And remember not to strawman me.

There was no place I said anyone mentored by their parents for 25years would automatically be successful in business.

And you called it a fact. Showing you really don't know what facts are.

You are sounding desperate now.

MRbrownJAY: wait no longer......... lol........ who cares what has more influence on a man's life when it comes to the growth of a business? a man can be an uneducated orphan and still create the best business out there AND ALSO, a man could be educated at the best schools in the world (with all the parental mentoring whatsoever) and fail miserably in life. the fact that you believe that any person mentored by his parents for 25yrs, would automatically make him successful in business, is your first fail of the day.

You are still dodging question. You have been dodging the quesion over and over and over again BECAUSE you KNOW the answer. And you know if you answer it, what ever answer you give, your argument is fcked.

We have to make assumptions here because we have no facts at hand, answer the question and show us your capability of making assumptions.

Answer the question I stop keeping me waiting.

I wait.

MRbrownJAY: bro, if you change your post as i reply them then we wont go anywhere with this, lol! stick to what you write and stand by it. lol!



so long as these assumption are realistic then yes, but if you gladly omit the obvious in this case, then it's pointless.
as much as what you wrote is "possible", i gave you clear point to show you that the opposite is also EQUALLY possible (unless you know something we dont know).



i understand you feel strongly about wealthy men in divorce who get ripped off, but i hope someday you will remember that there are many partner who deserve every bit of the share they got...... if you cant understand that, then it means you can never judge such problem fairly and with unbiased views.



thats YOUR biased views towards women in divorce, made from thin air, as you have absolutely no facts to back such claim.
again:- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the wifey had absolutely NO INPUT in the business whatsoever?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that she was in no way whatsoever remotely responsible for the growth of that business?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that her input in the family had absolutely NO IMPACT whatsoever on how the husband ran the business?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the only input the wife had in this family growth was to cook and clean?



...and this is why a court has t look at the evidence brought to them, and decide who deserves what...and so far they stated that she deserves £21Million.



how can you still ASSUME that her parents did more than her, when you have absolutely NO FACTS to back up your claims?! should we simply bow and believe all your biased assumptions?!



making assumptions out of thin air is the reason why so many have failed in the past.
they once said that the earth was flat, black men were inferior,HM WArner of Warner Brothers even "assumed" that people didnt want to hear actors talk, lol..... or better yet, Einstein assumed in 1932 that nuclear energy will never be obtainable, or GW Bush "assumed" that Saddam had WMD and killed gazillions of innocent people in the same process.....and if that wasnt enough, Bill Gates assumed and stated in 1981, that 640k ought to be enough for anybody.
so you keep assuming, like these people who were obviously DEAD WRONG!

Now answer the second one so I can address both at once:

https://www.nairaland.com/878081/nigerian-billionaire-battles-british-wife/13#11503319

MRbrownJAY: - how can you sit here and AGAIN assume that the parents did more to this family than the wife?! do you have any facts to back this claim?

You have been dodging the question.

Tell me, from your understanding and intelligence, what has more influence on an individual: Their nurturing or their marriage.

When you finish answering that, tell me, which do you (from your capability of making assumptions) think will have more influence: The mentorship of parents over about 25 years from birth or an 11 year marriage of a man from his 30s.

I wait.

MRbrownJAY: - how can you AGAIN assume that she only did homework? do you have any facts to back this claim?
- how can you AGAIN assume that she wasnt the reason the attain this lifestyle?do you have any facts to back this claim?
- how can you AGAIN assume that he did any duty? do you have any facts to back this claim?
i simply gave you reason to understand why she COULD be entitled to the family wealth, just like you believe that she shouldnt.

if you want to fight the laws of marriage around the world, then be my guest.....but so far as we know, thats the laws in place (in most countries in the west).
as for Zukenberg, i am just stating what the law say. if you have a problem with it, i suggest you take it up with lawmakers.....but so far as we know, THATS THE LAW! just because you dont want to follow the law, or are not ok with it, is another subject completely.

All these are nonsense, but I will pick one of them because it is just so ridiculous.

So you tell me AGAIN how you assumed she did any duty? Do you have any facts to back this claim?

Then after that, tell me how you based your argument on the "children" getting £21m to maintain their lifestyle if you believe he did not do his duty? Who was funding the lifestyle of £21m then?

Can you see how lame you are at making assumptions?

MRbrownJAY: ^^^^ thats exactly my point bro, it doesnt show her contribution to the wealth, AND EQUALLY, it doesnt show that she did NOT contribute to the wealth.

so how can you sit here and make claims about this lady like that, without any concrete facts?!

Can you see you are lost logically?

- There are no information available to us that will detail what happened in the relationship.

- Hence we have to make assumptions to arrive at an opinion if we are to discuss.

- You accuse me of and condemn me for making assumptions, which are frankly the most realistic and inteliigent assumptions based on the indicators at hand (lawyers arguments) and most prominent examples of wealth making (Simon Cowell, Mark Zuckerberg, Usain Bolt)

- While you yourself have made loads of assumptions with no facts that are lame and throwing stones in a glass house.

- So you can make assumptions, but it is wrong I make them?

Your problem, bruv, is that you have consumed the brainwash rubbish fed by the West to justify their attack on men in divorce without any critical analysis.

That is why you lamely say her housework contributed to the wealth, when EVIDENCE shows it normally does not and it will never amount to £21m if appraised for its monetary value. Which I have shown by highlighting to you MILLIONS of other women do EXACTLY the same and it does not result in billions of money.

That is why you lamely say he should continue funding the lifestyle she is used to, while not considering if she would guarantee the one he is used to. You fell for the lame bias against men.

That is why you think she should be paid for her duties, but when I highlighted to you logically that actually his parents did more than her, you state "Oh, it is their duty, they should not be paid". But you dig your hills in that she should be paid for raising her own kids. His parents should not be paid for raising him. You see that your logical wire is damaged?

Question what you are fed and you will develop the ability to make smart assumptions like mine when facts are not available.

MRbrownJAY: thats all the facts we have, and all the facts we need to understand that you are not making any sense in this matter.

What sense are you making when you say his parents that did more than the wife are not entitled to make claims for the duties they perform, while she can?

What sense are you making when you say her homework contributed to his success when there are tons of women doing exactly the same work in exactly the same way, or even more, and their husbands never get rich?

What sense are you making when you say he has to ensure she retains the lifestyle she is used to after divorce, but she has no duty to ensure he retains the lifestyle he is used to?

What sense are you making when you argue he should do his duty to their kids for free, while she should be paid for doing her duty to their kids?

What sense are you making when you argue that the wife of Mark Zuckerberg contributed to his wealth in 2013 and deserves a cut purely because they are married?

What sense are you making when you argue those are the rules and regulation, it is poor, but if you don't like it, don't marry?

MRbrownJAY: - these guys got married when both of them were broke.......FACT!
- during their marriage, they had 4 children......FACT!
- during their marriage, the husband got a loan from his father to start a company.........FACT!
- after a few yrs, this company (who is owned by the husband) is now worth £1billion or more....FACT!

thats all the facts we have, and all the facts we need to understand that you are not making any sense in this matter.

And so? How does that show her contribution to the wealth?

MRbrownJAY: lol, bro you are still making very little sense with assumptions upon assumptions.
no fact whatsoever, just stuff that are completely irrelevant to this case!

i repeat:
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the wifey had absolutely NO INPUT in the business whatsoever?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that she was in no way whatsoever remotely responsible for the growth of that business?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that her input in the family had absolutely NO IMPACT whatsoever on how the husband ran the business?
- how can you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the only input the wife had in this family growth was to cook and clean?

there is a 50/50% chance that she is actually entitled to whatever she demands, and stating by the FACTS, there is absolutely no way you can deny that....unless you know something about them PERSONALLY that you are not sharing with us (and not some IFs, BUTs and MAYBEs like what you have been saying all along)

btw: let us be wise and not use our friends and acquaintances experiences to judge this case.

Show me the facts YOU have made so far.

I wait.

MRbrownJAY: brotha Saga
you see, you are not thinking clearly at the moment:
- you "automatically" believe that this woman had absolutely NO input in this business whatsoever......ASSUMPTIONS!!
- you "automatically" believe that this woman did absolutely nothing in this marriage towards the family wealth......ASSUMPTIONS!!
- you "automatically" believe that all the money that was generated in this family is down to the husband.......ASSUMPTIONS!!

No, I am thinking very clearly and making intelligent assumptions.

As I said, she should leave with anything she earned in the marriage. If she has made any contribution to the wealth apart from being married to the guy that made the wealth, I am SURE her lawyers would have emphasised that in court with their arguments and the press would have reported it. Instead they are talking about "her lifestyle" just like you.

If she can show she contributed directly to the business THEN she can have her contribution, but to say she did her duties and raised their kids so she has to be paid, OR to say she is used to that lifestyle so he has to continue funding it, is gold-digging.

This is an example of the type of gold diggers that take money from hard working men and you never see them use the millions they take and build similar businesses to show they were worth it. Which is evidence they should never have got it in the first place.

MRbrownJAY: - you "automatically" believe that this woman, who asks for her fair share of the family wealth, is a golddigga (without having any facts whatsoever to back that claim)......ASSUMPTIONS!!

It is not the family wealth when they divorce. One person made it. Her share is what she made or could reasonably have made.

If she wants a share of it, she would have worked for it or worked hard to stay in the marriage.

There is nothing like family wealth when there is no family.

MRbrownJAY: - you "automatically" believe that this man would have made even MORE money (and NEVER less), if he wasnt married or had any kids....ASSUMPTIONS!!

If men take less time trying to meet women's needs or family life, they will have more time to focus on things like making money. Pure logic.

No "I can't come to Toronto for 3 months for business discussions because I am married and have to read bed time stories to my kids or my wife will complain".

MRbrownJAY: - you "automatically" believe that wifey's input in the family, had absolutely NO impact on how this man ran his business.....ASSUMPTIONS AGAIN!!

You are yet to show me her input did. You attempt has been very, very lame. Your assumptions has been very very lame.

He made his money because of:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hardwork.
- His preparation through the education his parents paid for and supported him through.
- The nurturing and mentorship his parents gave him.
- The networks and connections he made.

Just like Mark Zuckerberg.
Just like Simon Cowell.
Just like Lewis Hamilton.
Just like Bill Gates.
Just like Kobe Bryant.
Just like Tiger Woods.
Just like Paul McCartney.
Just like Usain Bolt.
Just like Christiano Ronaldo.
Just like Mario Balotelli.

Brilliant assumptions made from clear, abundant and brilliant examples. What did you base your assumptions on?

MRbrownJAY: ......and yet, you are saying that i am the one who is not making any sense?! ok then, so let us all STICK TO THE FACTS AT HANDS, instead of coming up with IFs, BUTs and MAYBEs:

What sense are you making when you say his parents that did more than the wife are not entitled to make claims for the duties they perform, while she can?

What sense are you making when you say her homework contributed to his success when there are tons of women doing exactly the same work, or even more, and their husbands never get rich?

What sense are you making when you say he has to ensure she retains the lifestyle she is used to after divorce, but she has no duty to ensure he retains the lifestyle he is used to?

What sense are you making when you argue he should do his duty to their kids for free, while she should be paid for doing her duty to their kids?

What sense are you making when you argue that the wife of Mark Zuckerberg contributed to his wealth in 2013 and deserves a cut purely because they are married?

What sense are you making when you argue those are the rules and regulation, it is poor, but if you don't like it, don't marry?

Please explain.

MRbrownJAY: - these guys got married when both of them were broke.......FACT!

And so?

That is evident she made the money for him? Poor argument.

MRbrownJAY: - during their marriage, they had 4 children......FACT!
- during their marriage, the husband got a loan from his father to start a company.........FACT!
- after a few yrs, this company (who is owned by the husband) is now worth £1billion or more....FACT!

And so?

He also bought shampoo from head and shoulders during that period, does that mean P&G contributed to his wealth making ability?

MRbrownJAY: now looking at the above facts, think for a minute (or two), and pls care to tell us all:
- how you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the wifey had absolutely NO INPUT in the business whatsoever?
- how you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that she was in no way whatsoever remotely responsible for the growth of that business?
- how you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that her input in the family had absolutely NO IMPACT whatsoever on how the husband ran the business?
- how you confirmed, with CERTAINTY, that the only input the wife had in this family growth was to cook and clean?

Don't ask me questions until you answer my questions in my long post above.

MRbrownJAY: bro, i know that there are many goldigging broke [b]a[/b]ss begging women out there, i hate them as much as you do, but to automatically put ALL women in that category (as soon as a man has/makes money), is far fetched. this lady married this guy when he was broke as hell.... the fact that you automatically call her a golddigga when she demands for her fair share of the family wealth (without you having a SINGLE clue about how the family wealth was generated), undoubtedly shows us all that you are not thinking constructively, possibly due to some hatred towards goldiggaz (who can blame you?).

Until you can dig proof for me that she contributed directly about £21m to his wealth that he would not have been able to make if he never married her, then she is a gold digger asking for money she did not earn.

No parasites. Work for your own money.

My friend will be a partner in 4 years and will most likely be making £1m a year in the next 8 years, and your likes will come with your lame logic that any woman he marries in future is the source of the money (and should get a cut) instead of:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hardwork.
- His preparation through the education his parents paid for and supported him through.
- The nurturing and mentorship his parents gave him.
- The networks and connections he made.

All of which I have seen in him and/or continue to see him do.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18895366

MJB, according to your logic, when he marries, it will be his wife's cooking and cleaning and the peace of mind she gave him that made him successful and rich.

Not:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hardwork.
- His preparation through the education his parents paid for and supported him through.
- The nurturing and mentorship his parents gave him.
- The networks and connections he made.

The same fcking factors that are consistent in the background of AAAAALLLLLL entrepreneurially wealthy people, married or not.

His ex-wife should come and be a parasite that he should, by law, sustain her lifestyle.

What utter gibberish!

[quote author=Sisi_Kill]Thanks. . .that clears it up!![/quote]When people tell them to stay in school and focus in school, they will not listen.

antitpiah: Retarddddd. OAU drop-out, see your life

You are a pathetic person!

So you have turned into a desperado that will edit my post?

How does it feel to be dumb and made to look dumb?

annawhite:
Was trying to catch ur attention and I'm glad it did!

antitpiah: You and with your ghetto English sha.

Sagababoon, you can do better!

person you still want me to humiliate you with your use of English?

Cretin!

How does it feel to know you are dumb?

Tgirl4real: Sisi kill, Sagamite must not see this thread o

Honestly, I can't really judge. There are too many dumb arse people on this Earth.

If 90% of the world is dumb and the world is 50% women, 50% men, how can one assess who is smarter when the odds of picking each random person would reveal a 90% chance that they are a person like deshclones?

MRbrownJAY: no no no, my point is that the reward is partly for the children's (and wife) maintenance of the lifestyle they enjoyed before. they both started as poor, and rised to become wealthy, they both enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle, and therefore they should keep such lifestyle after divorce. no matter how you wanna look at it, wifey was part of the family, and therefore she deserve a sahre of that wealth (whether he earned it or she did)

again bro, the reward is not ALL down to her needs but also the needs of the children. how do you expect her to keep the kind of lifestyle the family previously had, if he doesnt give her a fair share of the "family" wealth?!

Well, he is putting forward £2.5m plus £35K annually towards the kids. That is surely fantastic.

Majority of us in the top 10% of earners in the UK live on less than that and might not even get up to that in our lifetime. But this is being given to kids for roughly 10 years. KIDS!

Why should the wife keep such a lifestyle after divorce? She DESERVES what she contributed and how she has developed herself! NO PIGGYBACKING! NO PARASITE on other people's hard work.

Why should he fund her lifestyle?

That is the most useless excuse? Well, he is used to having his house clean and his laundry done, are you going to say she should continue doing that for him? WHY SHOULD HE SUSTAIN HER LIFESTYLE AND SHE SHOULD NOT SUSTAIN HIS after divorce?

You are speaking with 2 mouths now. You claim the money is for the kids and at the same time you are saying the wife should get the money.

MRbrownJAY: #1 if the person that "supposedly" financed their lifestyle isnt reasonable about the share of the family wealth, then a mediator (aka the court) has to come in settle it fairly.

#2 why should she?! i doubt she provided periodic invoices before, and therefore she shouldnt do so now (unless there is a clear concern about that). the grandparents probably never raised the children before, and therefore i dont see any reason why the children care should suddenly be taken away from their mother. her status as a good mother is not in question, is it?!

#3 if the mother is the legal guardian of these children, then she needs the appropriate funds to keep the lifestyle that these kids are accustomed to (as well as her own). this is part of the reason why she asked for £40Million.....and the court decided that she only needed £21million to sustain such lifestyle.

Again you continue with speaking with 2 mouths.

She should get ridiculous money and no one should monitor if it is going to the kids (that YOU claim to care so much about)?

You care so-so-so-so-so-so-much about the kids getting the millions they "need" to live on from their dad but you do not care about whether the money they get is actually being spent on them.

Come off the lame arguments. Stop speaking with 2 mouths.

MRbrownJAY: yet you dont see the point in which the fact that she shared the burden of raising DEMANDING children, is a reason why it made his life easier to live?! children needs in itself is ALSO time, money and labour consuming. that is time, money and labour that he used to make money, while wifey took over that duty. the fact that you believe that her job at home is irrelevant to this family well-being is a bit strange.

It is HER DUTY! You yourself said people should not be rewarded for their duty?

So he was not a "demanding child" when his parents were making him who he was, how come you argue the parents should not be able to claim money from him, that it is their duty?

You also seem to not be aware these are NOT HIS kids. These are THEIR kids. So THEY are BOTH responsible for catering for the kids. If he is providing all the finances to bring up the kids, what is her contribution to bringing up the kids?

MRbrownJAY: you and your assumptions, lol! yes some married women cheat, just as much as hard working married men do. do you have any proof whatsoever that this lady is one of such cheating women? or is it just one of your many generalization?! lets stick to fact, shall we?

Oh, when you say "DEMANDING KIDS" that is not assumption?

When you say she is a dutiful wife that works hard, that is not assumptions?

Moreover, where did I say she cheated?

MRbrownJAY: may i suggest that you either A) dont try to mix business with family life B) start dating proper women that will be on your level intellectually, and with the same goals/vision or C) start dating these long time friends for future peace of mind, LOL!!!!!

Most successful men don't date women at their level.

Most millionaires don't date women at their level.

But both have friends at their level.

Friends contribute more to success, on average, than wives. Do the friends have to be paid?

MRbrownJAY: the parent's contribution was key to his rise as a human being, as a smart educated man, but has very little to do with the well-being of his life as a family man. if it was, then he would have married his parents, instead of this lady.
the parents contribution was key while he was growing up, the wife's contribution was key when he got married, shared his life with this lady and became a family man.
his present success is partly due to his upbringing AND current status as an happy well grounded family man, and therefore, although she doesnt deserve ALL the family wealth, she does deserve part of it (20/30% IMHO). thinking that she deserves only 0.25% of the family wealth is a grave insult.

What I asked you was that, who contributed more to the success he has today: His parents or his wife.

Don't dodge the question. You can be as verbose as you want, but I will demand you answer it.

MRbrownJAY: your success is down to many factors.....and the well being of your family is one of these factors. we all know that people that being in a successful union is key to happiness, and happiness will make that man do a better job at work. if he was down and out worried about the kids, the wifey etc then he wouldnt do sduch a great job at work....and thats a fact!

BS!

The core factors of success is:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hardwork.
- His preparation through the education his parents paid for and supported him through.
- The nurturing and mentorship his parents gave him.
- The networks and connections he made.

Those are what make people rich. Otherwise men with happy families will automatically be rich. There are several men with UNHAPPY families that are successful and if you look at their backgrounds you will find that it is due to:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hardwork.
- His preparation through the education his parents paid for and supported him through.
- The nurturing and mentorship his parents gave him.
- The networks and connections he made.

MRbrownJAY: if he was unmarried then he wouldnt have to pay some lady £21Million, but he IS married, and we really cant sit here and make "assumptions" about ifs buts and maybes. this man knew the consequences of getting married, and the laws that comes with such act. he made the CONSCIOUS decision to enter such contract, and now should follow the follow and pay up. if this man is such a smart and savvy business man,(as you claim) then he should have known that.

But you can make assumptions that if his family is unhappy he wouldn't be successful?

Really?

I will ask you again and stop dodging the questions: He most likely would still be successful if he was unmarried, he would just have different women in his bed every 6 months. If he divorces, he would STILL be successful. His marriage has no baring on his wealth anymore than his choice of holiday destination or the shower gel he uses. It is his brain and self-development he has done over time.

MRbrownJAY: she is paid that amount to KEEP the lifestyle that they (children and her) enjoyed while a family unit.

How come you "assume" that £21m is the lifestyle they lived?

What makes you sure £2.5 and £35K is not sufficient for the lifestyle they lived?

MRbrownJAY: make up your mind bro, its either she does her "duty" as a wife and care for the kids or she doesnt...... but f she does then she should do so in the same kind of environment as prior marriage. if supposedly (as you stated) that a wife is time wasting, then what about children then?! we wouldnt want this man to "waste" any more valuable time on raising kids, would we?!

I don't need to make up my mind? How? Where did I contradict myself about their past?

How is my opinion of their past a contradiction of what I think the future should be?

Don't strawman me, I don't like it.

MRbrownJAY: again, he did HIS duties and she did HERS, for the well-being of their family. thanks to each doing their duties, this family was able to grow (as a unit) both in wealth and lifestyle. if this unit was to be separated, then there is a need to allocate a certain amount of money in order for both parties to keep living the lifestyle that they enjoyed (as a family). the fact that you want to make it look like the wife had no input to how this family grew whatsoever, and that the husband's duty is the ONLY reason it did, is wrong on so many levels.
also, if they flew private jet as a family BEFORE, then they should do so now.......if they never did, then i understand why they shouldnt now.

The need to allocate money should be based on what you worked for. NO PIGGYBACKING! NO PARASITES!

How did I make it look like the wife had no input to how the family grew?

Because I said her input has no significant impact on his money-making ability, means if has no value in family raising?

You are strawmanning me again?

Why should she be rewarded for doing her duties but he is not rewarded? Why should he make sure she gets the lifestyle she is used to but she would not make sure he gets the lifestyle he is used to? Will she go and do his dishes, laundry and fck him after divorce?

MRbrownJAY: yes this is the main reason why he was successful AT work, but it sure aint the main reason why he was successful at home, as a family man......which helped him greatly. so yes, wifey doesnt deserve half but she sure deserve much more than what he offered.

So you "assume" he was successful at home?

And "assume" this is due to his wife's contribution?

But you did not "assume" they might have nannies?

And you throw accusations left, right and centre about assumptions when you cannot defend a point?

MRbrownJAY: well i doubt there is much difference between ZERO and 0.25 (which is what he offered) come on dude!!!!

Considering her earning ability and potential it is a HUGE DIFFERENCE! She should be grateful getting money she can never earn herself!

MRbrownJAY: the day you you have a disagreement with any of the above you mentionned, they may ask you to pay up on any profit you made , thanks to them. its called LIFE!

How will friends, parents, siblings tell me to pay them? Under what law?

MRbrownJAY: people should leave marriage with what they had, and if some children are involved, then they should make arrangements for them. if people entered marriage broke, and they built a family fortune "together", then we should be careful in deciding how to share this wealth accordingly. if the cannot come to an understanding, then let court decide......that is the LAW!!!!
if you want to break the law then fair enough, be my guest, but i would rather follow the law (or not get married foolishly, like this man did)

People did not build a fortune together except they directly worked on the fortune together.

Cooking, cleaning and nanying is not build a fortune. Simon Cowell's cook and househelp can NEVER come and ask for a cut of his wealth based on their "contribution" to his peace of mind.

That is as lame as saying Andy Murray' brother built a fortune with him. I am sure as a fellow tennis player and an older brother he advises and does shyt loads for Andy, more than any wife, yet he cannot claim a dime because Andy BUILT the fortune on his own. Any moral and familial support is given lovingly and free.

MRbrownJAY: 1) and it was his duties to provide for the family.... now the family is well off, worth about 4 healthy kids and £1billion, and now you suddenly say that "if they divorce his duties are his, and her duties are hers" lol.........how do you compensate her for her duties? how do you even calculate it?! pls enlighten us.

2) you are again focussing on the wrong issue. the important point to remember is that, he came in this union with jack shiit (not even kids), he is now worth four kids + £1billion thanks to many factor (wifey included). how do you intend to separate their family properly and maturely so that each and everyone involved can go on their separate ways and continue enjoy the LIFE they created for themselves?!

3) pls care to tell me in %age, how much was her contribution to this family then?!

4) her contribution is a determinant of the well-being of this family, which is a direct factor of the wealth this family built.....as we all know that a babysitting/worried/unhappy/stressed man cannot do a good job at work.

1) And he did his duty then too. Now she is going to stop her duty to him, he should stop his duty to her. But you say he must maintain her lifestyle. BS!

2) RUBBISH! I am not focussing on the wrong issues, I am focussing on the right issues. I am showing you her contribution has no direct baring to his money making by referring to other people that made EXACTLY the same contribution like her, or EVEN MORE contribution than her, and yet it did not materialise in the same wealth from their husbands. Hence proving to you that other reasons are the factors and influence resulting in his wealth. That is pure genius on my part!

3) You do the calculation of (a) how much she would have made on her own if she was not doing her duties or (b) how much it would cost to higher others to do her duties.

4) It has NO DIRECT factor, otherwise the husbands of other women doing the same would be billionaires too. Why are they not? That is just the first point. SECONDLY, if he did not marry her, he would still likely have been able to make his wealth as a single man. TWO SOLID POINTS!

MRbrownJAY: assumptions assumptions again, lol!

don't throw stones in a glass house.

This is almost a certainty:

Her contribution, I repeat, is not a determinant of his wealth. Without her contribution, he would still have made his wealth. On the other hand, without his parents contribution, he would probably be a nobody. He will end up like an almajiri. Yet the parents cannot dare ask for £21m, but you feel some gold-digger is entitled to it for enjoying his money with him. Is that fair?

Solid logical reasoning.

MRbrownJAY: thats said marriage comes with RULES and REGULATIONS. everyone who enters into marriage knows exactly what they are getting themselves into. if anyone is against the laws of marriage then they should NOT get married, et voila!

This is a completely weak argument.

If rules and regulations are wrong. YOU CHANGE IT, not ACCEPT IT!

Would you say if any woman is against the law of Saudi that women should not drive, then she should get out of the country and the law should not be changed or debated?

Would you say if any woman is against the law of Nigeria that shafts women and leave them with their kids destitute after divorce, then she should not marry and the law should not be changed or debated?

Would you say if any worker is against their working conditions by a Chinese firm that does not give them (local blacks) basic labour rights, then they should shut up and not take the job and the law should not be changed or debated to correct their treatment?

Can you see how extremely weak your point is?

deshclones: niggah i don't have your time..i chose not to challenge you because you have nothing to impress me with..you are as empty as empty can be..go look for who to exchange words with like the market woman that you are...i am discussing serious issues here..when i want to learn new insults i will call on you..now run along..your elders are talking..

You are a person!

You come online to boast about an education you don't have, cretin!

Did you buy the certificates?

You talk like a fooool!

deshclones: dude..you are your family's god....am not your mate in any ramification....you might be my senior age wise..but heck..thats where it ends...am your yesterday,today and your tomorrow..i dare you shymex..for each qualification or personal property details(your own not inherited or daddy's own) you post here..i will post two..i dare you...if not know that i am not desh clones...it is true we are on a faceless forum but am ready to expose the real desh..post your first degree and i will post my m.sc..post your m.sc and i will post a more higher qualification...and i await you...do it you professional dimwit

You are a moronic person!

This is the rubbish you learnt from your failed education?