₦airaland Forum

deshclones: The same education system that repeatedly failed your sorry arse....lmfao...good a thing i am working with the same certificate issued by the same educational system you criticize while you wander about in the thick jungle of failure..give it up man..you are a monumental failure..little wonder why 99.9% of your posts are filled with severe hate and anger.quit blaming anybody for your slf imposed failure....35year old man taking picture in a reflective lift..how silly can you get...just get busy,get a life and try and salvage whatever is remaining of your sorry life...or better still go and die..you are too frustrated and stupid to live.

This is what your education taught you?

https://www.nairaland.com/961900/sex-without-condom-best

FOOOOOOL! Who is the monumental failure?

An illiterate thinking sitting in a class with unqualified teachers is being educated.

You think you have an education when you are taught by educationists like this:

https://www.nairaland.com/912090/lagos-state-legalize-voluntary-cremation/1#10745059

You are a person! A product of a failed education system.

No wonder you talk and think like a proper cretin!

And that sequence of talk and think was put like that intentionally, FOOOOL!

deshclones: Thats all you can come up with....dude you are so lame....up your game you jobless dimwit...gej is Einstein compared to you....jobless Arrow..keep dissing the same nigerian education system that you shameless could not pass....

You are a person!

I have proved you are a person!

You are a product of a failed ..........what? Finish it, I have told you so many times it should be a nursery rhyme in your head by now!

deshclones: ...sagamite intelligent...oh my days ..sagamite that got kicked out of OAU for failing mere gss course....GEJ is Einstein when compared to you man...you should flex muscle with the likes of born2fuck or lefulefu...


N.B:THE WORST YOU CAN DO IS CALL ME person...OR CRETIN..THATS ALL YOU CAN DO ANYWAYS..HURL INSULTS.

person! (Yeah, that is what you are )

You are not a tenth as intelligent as I am if I am in a coma with brain damage.

FOOOOOOL!

This is the proof you are a person:

www.nairaland.com/703056/getting-married-girl-3rd-class/1#10449029

www.nairaland.com/703056/getting-married-girl-3rd-class/2#10449591

Product of a failed education system.

If we did not have a moronic Silverback Gorilla as President and have someone with my intellect as President, even though I might not have direct powers to stop this under the law, I would have the powers to bear pressure on this fucktards to deter them from the exploitation of public funds.

Anytime any of these State, legislative or Local government thieves waste public funds to travel, within a week of them coming back I will send EFCC to audit them.

When fucktards know, when you travel, you invite audit of your books to the last kobo. And that will no doubt reveal some misspending that will send people to jail, they will dare not engage in this kind of wastage.

But, hell, our Nigerian cretins voted for the buffoon called Jonathan.

I pray to God local kidnappers are looking at these pics and storing them for their next operation.

Unfortunately most kidnappers are fucktards.

MRbrownJAY: says who?! the court of Sagamite. come on bro, you are not fair, and i do feel a bit sorry for the lady(ies) you share your life with.

Her contribution is not worth £21m, says logic, based on the following points:

1) It is her duty.

2) There are others that contribute the same or more (even without Nannies and the finances) and they will not get £21m for their contribution because they are not married to a man with the ability to make that. Does that mean their superior contribution is less? No, it means their contribution is not of that value logically.

3) If we are to rationally price her contribution (like for nannies, nurses, cleaners, cooks etc), it will NEVER come to £21m.

4) Her contribution is not a determinant of his wealth.

So, bruv, take your pick from those 4 points of how her contribution is logically not worth £21m and arrive at logic says: Her contribution is not worth £21m, she is just a gold digger.

That said, we all know logic is the middle name of Sagamite. So Sagamite also says so.

MRbrownJAY: yes but would he have made AS MUCH?!

At least, he would have more.

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?

MRbrownJAY: did you make the conscious decision to share your life in "matrimony, in sickness and in health till death do you part" with your siblings, parents etc?! i think not, and therefore we shouldnt mix apples with oranges.

Those are all useless ceremonial words that are broken everyday. Please don't quote them. Quote things that are logical.

Marriage is about fancying someone and wanting to keep them to yourself. All the words used in the official rituals to keep that person to yourself means jack nothing apart from being part of a ceremony! Once you stop fancing someone and don't want to keep them to yourself (called end of Marriage), those words are discarded. So, you see my friend, they are just ceremonial, sweet words.

Marriage is NOT a contract, it is a ceremony.

Jarus: Yeah, stranger series: z, f, x etc

Ko ba idi e!

May kraw-kraw catch you yansh tomorrow morning and last one whole week.

A God like me and a person!

Are you serious?

Dotman01: Q.e.d and one prof guy
Eko ile and gbawe

More like

Eko Ile and Beaf.

4play and PhysicsMHD

OAM4J and oyb

Fhemmmy and Horus.

Jarus: It's still hard for me to believe Mr Cork & 190 are not the same person. Act too similarly.

Others:
Ibime and Debosky
Stranger & Sagamite

Is this fstranger or another person called Stranger?

Musiwa and Theblessed.

tpia and cap28.

dayokanu and chic2pimp.

Jarus and Ajanlekoko.

violent and davidylan.

Gbawe and Ekitibear.

Kilode and Katsumoto.

Mukina and Pendo89.

pro01 and Harakiri.

jay bee and Jesus the son of God.

Idowuogbo: Queensmith bawo? Guy stop snorting Jare!

He must be high on some serious Waffi weed to compare you to queensmith.

MRbrownJAY: AHAHAHAHAHA my point exactly....... if there was NO children he shouldnt pay up anything, but there ARE children and thats the reason why he should pay up.

No! That was not your point. Your point is that he should reward her for taking care of their kids. The same kids that probably hold him down from making more money.

Because of kids does not mean he has to reward her. She wanted kids and it is her job to take care of them.

Will she pay him for putting a roof over everyone's heads and paying for their lifestyle in the marriage? So why should he pay her for looking after their kids?

MRbrownJAY: dont get me wrong, she is not getting paid to take care of her children, she is getting paid to make sure she can keep the children in the same "setting" in which they were before the divorce. so if they ate 6 course meals (3 times a day), then thats what they deserve now. if they lived a luxurious lifestyle before, then they surely deserve that now also.

No 1, I think the person that is to finance that is the one to make that decision.

No 2, if it is that important, she should be made to provide periodic invoices/receipts that the money is going towards the kids, or pass the kids to the parent with the finances to provide the critical lifestyle.

No 3, her asking for £40m and the award of £21m is a case of reward, not money for the kids lifestyle.

MRbrownJAY: the ones married to poor men do yes, but wives of billionaires?! i think not, lol!

yes they do, and we men like to give them the attention they need....unless you'd rather someone else give it to your partner? most men know such fact about women and that doesnt stop any of them to get married with these same women.

Come off it! All women moan, no matter how rich you are. They are born to nag and need attention.

That need in itself is time, money and labour consuming. That is time, money and labour that could have been used for making more money. Wasting your time on stewpid arguments and emotional baggage is a big part of being with a woman.

Evident from the fact that men who work hard to make money end up with women that are cheating on them. So she is more likely to have cost him money and should be compensating him, not him compensating her.

I have known most of my friends for more than 15 years and I know the combined amount of time I spend arguing with all of them (combined) over those years is far less than I do with just one woman I date for 6 months. And I get more business ideas/advice from my friends than from a woman, yet my friends can't claim jackshyt.

MRbrownJAY: how can you compare his parent's contributions to his life (growing up) with the contribution his wife made towards the wellbeing of their family/union?
how can you compare a parent/child relationship with a wife/husband relationship?! this is a complete different ball game, bro!
again you are focussing on "making money" while i am talking about his whole life as a person/family man. if you do believe that a wife brings NOTHING to a (family) man's wellbeing/growth/maturity/LIFE ....then pls, tell me what is the reason for anyone to get married then?! lol

Why can you not compare it?

I thought you were the one claiming a certain contribution is key to his success?

Which contribution do you think is more key? Parent's or wife's?

Which one has more value in terms of contribution to his present success?

Which one has more magnitude on a man's wellbeing/growth/maturity/Life?

Tell me, MJB!

MRbrownJAY: and yet this supposedly fulfilled man decided toget married...obviously he was lacking something that SHE brought to the picture. should that be dismissed simply because she wasnt in the board room with him?

Who talked about fulfillment? That is a strawman! You are strawmanning me, bruv.

So because I make friends means the friends are key to my success and should be paid? So what if he married? You think he married to be successful or aid his success? I don't get your point.

Admit it: 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: again, the parents cannot demand for anything because it was their DUTIES (as parents) to raise this child the best they could, so that he also could get a family of his own someday and be happy.

OH, DUTIES!

And it is HER DUTY as a wife to take care of the home and her kids, why should she be paid £21m for that?

MRbrownJAY: the worth of Petrobel (or whatever the name of the company is) is his worth. this is what he was trying to change by bringing some BS tribal law about the comapny belonging to his entire family.

Remember that people take money out of their firm and rarely do they own big ones on their own.

He could have stored millions in offshore bank accounts under anonymous names.

MRbrownJAY: true that, but that is not a reason to suddenly decide to have them live worse off than they were before marriage..... the emotional issue is big enough as it is, why would you want to add more to their lives? it would not kill them to live in a shack in the deepest jungle of Africa too, should we therefore do that? they should have the SAME lifestyle as they had prior to divorce.

If it is critical they live the high lifestyle, let the wife let him have custody except he does not want it or will neglect them. Lets not pull the "Oh, kids" BS to favour one party.

MRbrownJAY: again, you have to look at it constructively, and not solely in NUMBERS. this "family" is worth more than £1000millions, money that was made DURING their marriage....and yet you want to make us believe that she and the children are only entitled to £2million out of this +£1000Million?!

You have already said it yourself:

People should not be paid for doing their DUTIES!

Simples!

Is he being paid for providing the finances and comfort of the family? Why should she be paid then for doing her part?

The kids will get their entitlement when he dies. And that in itself is based on his judgement. He can decide to give 95% to Oxfam.

No one should tell him how he should spend his hard earned money as long as he is providing reasonably for kids he brought into this world pre-their-adulthood.

If he decides he wants to fly private jet and his kids should take economy, it is no one's business.

MRbrownJAY: that is only "part" of the reason why he was the way he was during the marriage to this lady.

Those are the main, the overwhelming and the core reasons why he is wealthy. Those are the assumptions a sane, logical, intelligent and fair judicial system should be making as default basis until disproven.

Without those reasons, he would most likely not have made his money.

Without his wife, he most likely would.

It is simples, MJB! Don't let me bring out the meerkats advert to tell you, bruv.

MRbrownJAY: assumption again....how can you be sure about that? how are you 110% sure that her contribution to his life/well being/peace of mind, is zero?!
the wellbeing of his family/home is part of the reason he could fully focus on making the business thrive. the reason why he could direct his entire focus and attention to the biz.

Don't strawman me, bruv!

I never said it was zero. I said:

- It was not worth £21m
- It does not have to be paid for.

I don't pay my friends, parents, siblings, cousins, bosses for their contribution to my well being, fulfillment and peace of mind. Those are not things we pay for. They are FREE!

Well except you use hookers sha.

MRbrownJAY: bro, I wont sit here and try to rewrite the law, i will only let you know of what I (MBJ) believe its fair.
so if a two people get married, and during this marriage they makes a certain amount of money, then this should be split equally (or at least part of it if there is a prenup)

Hell No!

What is fair is for people to leave marriage with:

What they earned + any compensatory opportunity cost + what their partners willingly wants to give them as extra - what they want to give their partner as extra.

THAT IS FAIR! No parasites, no piggy-backing after you say "I don't".

dayokanu: Ppl fail to see education and the hardwork he put in as a bachelor as INVESTMENT and the income as proceeds of initial investment

Without those initial Investment he would never have any Income she would want to share.

So Question. if I buy stock or Govt bonds as a bachelor and they are paying me for the rest of my life why should i share it? And what has the woman who want part of it contributed to the investment?

No no, it is when a woman comes and kiss you, have kids and cook that you develop your ability to make money. Without the woman, you will never make that money.

I don't pay my parents for being parents, I don't my siblings for being siblings, I don't pay my friends for being freinds, but people feel I have to pay my wife for being a wife.

Yet the former 3 are likely to have contributed more to my life and potential than any women.

My closest buddy is on a fast track lane to partnership in his firm. When he marries, his successs will be attributed to his wife? BS.

I KNOW he is where he is today 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.

I have seen it over the years, I have discussed it with him.

FACT 1: Her contribution is not worth £21m.

FACT 2: Without her contribution he would still have made his money.

FACT 3: She should not be paid for her wifely contribution, we don't pay people for being parents, brothers, sisters or friends irrespective of their support and warmth, why wife then?

FACT 4: These are moronic unjust laws made to placate women and punish men.

dayokanu: If the guy has made investment in his pre wedding days and he is just getting the returns after wedding, Should he share those proceeds?

Well that is his argument, and his defence is "because the moronic law says so"!

MRbrownJAY: it is very simple, this man would have spent more time WORRYING about his children whereabouts, wellbeing etc if wifey was not there to SHARE the burden of raising children......so he would have spent less time making money at work, and more time at home spending time raising children...... unless you want to sit here and claim that he would have left his children care to maids and servants 24hrs a day while he spends his days at works?! meaning leaving your children to be raised by strangers, lol!

No!

If the wife was not there, he would not have had children and would have had more time to make money. So she is not entitled to his money, maybe she needs to be compensating him instead.

Secondly, a woman should not be paid for taking care of her kids, kids she wanted and kids that she is going to get in a custody ruling. He most likely did her a favour giving her kids!

MRbrownJAY: assumptions again....... who said she was moaning? who said she didnt contribute to his well being after work? as much as we dont know much about this family history, we cant sit here and paint a black picture of what she did (or not do). there is a 50% chance that she is the reason he made millions because of how he could recharge his batteries after work, thanks to HER.

Women moan! That is a fact!

Women demand and need attention. That is a fact!

What contribution did she make to his well being that has any impact on his ability to make his money? What CONTRIBUTIONS can she EVER make that can be on par with the ones his parents made, yet the parents can't claim a dime, why should she be able to?

There is less than 0.5% chance she is the reason he made his millions. He made his millions based on:

- 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.

Majority (probably 85%) of which can be attributed to his parents, not his wife! Under the law, can his parents come and ask for money? How come you think the wife should be able to? Just because some mooorons made the law?

MRbrownJAY: if he did successfully then A) the court wouldnt have awarded such amount and B) he wouldnt try to come up with some BS "tribal" law about the company belonging to his family, lol!

It is still a court case and the court appear not to know his real worth.

MRbrownJAY: then bro, your only way out is to go and live in the jungle, because if you live in the real world then you would most definitely have to settle your wifey. your choice should be to be FAIR to the woman who was with you through the ups and downs..... and if you believe that giving 2% of your total wealth is NOT fair, then you are clearly living in lala land.

In the real world, there are ways around it if you are smart enough. Trust me!

You just have to be aware and prepared and not live in some moronic lala land thinking you don't need prenup and bury your head in the sand that everything would be okay in marriage.

Fck that!

MRbrownJAY: so you mean you suddenly want to change the lifestyle of these kids?! if what was done before was perfectly fine, then there is no reason why it should change now that they are divorcing.

the court would/should automatically decide that they have the EXACT same lifestyle that they had prior to divorce. why should it automatically change?! the kid should stay with the parent who was there for the kid all the time......and THEY (both parents) paid for the upbringing before the divorce, as i am sure it was from THEIR account, dont get it twisted.

If there is a divorce, their life will INEVITABLY change. It will not kill them. It is LIFE! Lets not play this BS "oh, kids" cards to favour one party.

They will never have exactly the same life after divorce and it will not kill them.

MRbrownJAY: sadly husband would deserve half of the money, because that is money she made while they were married and he is entiltled to his share.

That law is RUBBISH!

MRbrownJAY: people have their duties in a union and i dont think it is as easy as you want to make it......but the sad fact is that they wifey CONTRIBUTED to the wellbeing of this family, and that is part of the reason why this guy was the way he was. just like when you go to war, the soldiers are doing much more than what the cook in the unit did, but they ALL contributed to the victory. how can you claim that all what she did for the family is not even worth 2% of their wealth/success?!

you are focussing on the MONEY, while disregarding the wellbeing of their home. YOU are the one who should prove that the wifey didnt contribute to ANYTHING in the wellbeing of their home, lol!

Well, her contribution is not and WILL NEVER be worth £21m. She should get what she contributed and I am sure it is well below the offer he is making.

The way the guy is 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.

Simples!

If she was not there, if he decided not to marry, it is most likely he would STILL have been able to make his money.

Her contribution is not key to the money he made.

I will say it again. It 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.

Simply simples, MJB!

MRbrownJAY: remember people, she shouldnt get money from the wealth that he already had before marriage, but she should certainly get a share of the income/profit he will make in 2013 from that wealth..... thats the law of marriage! if any of you brothas dont like it then you should A) not get married/settle with a lady or B) have a TIGHT prenup!

Why should she get a share of his money in 2013?

Did she work for it?

Does she have the ability to make it on her own?

You think something is justified just because some buffoons made it law?

dayokanu: So the money Zukerberg makes in 2013 is because he married the girl in 2012?

When he was already a billionaire befire marrying her?

The woman should only be entitled if she contributed to the business that made the money or she gave up her own career at the request of the man

I wonder o!

The logic just does not work at ALL.

The money Zuckerberg will make in 2013 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.

Simples!

MRbrownJAY: ^^^^ bro Saga
my stand on the issue is VERy simple........if a man has money before he enters into a marriage then he should be entitled to EVERY PENNY he had before, and the wifey ZERO (from that wealth), but if he was dead broke before marriage, then married this gal and, during that marriage made gazillions, then she should be entitled to part of that money. yes, he was the one at work hard but she was there with him when he came back home to sooth his mind and life....she was part of the reason why he was the way he was at work..... having a wifey/partner to ease your mind after work, and help you relax counts for a lot.

Bruv, I completely disagree with that philosophy.

The only ways a woman should be entitled to part of his money are:

1) He willingly wants to give it.
2) She contributed to the value of the part she is asking for.
3) There is proof that he would not have made the money without her.

So I don't buy that your argument he is the reason the way he was at work because of her. Rubbish!

He is most likely the way he is because of:

- His God-given personality and brains.
- His hard work.
- 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.

If she was not in his life , most likely he would still make his money, maybe even more because he would not have someone moaning for attention. Most times, most wives do not contribute as much as a hundredth of what parents do for people to guarantee their success, yet parents can not even go to court and claim a dime, yet you think a wife is ENTITLED to part of the money? Come off it, bruv.

MRbrownJAY: there is NO WAY in hell this man will either A) win the appeal B) hide any money (that wasnt hidden beforehand) or C) get away with paying up the full amount awarded.....none whatsoever, unless he is willing and stoopid enough to crash run his billion dollar company to the ground, in order not to pay £21Million ( a business move that makes ABSOLUTELY no sense!

He seem to have already hidden it.

MRbrownJAY: if you rather thrown money away than pay 2% of your wealth to the mother of your four kids, then it says a lot about how bitter you are about this woman......and should rather focus on the wellbeing of your kids.

I will not let a court dictate to me unjustly how to give my ex money and I would not let an ex-wife think she can milk me and punish me unjustly. If I was to give £21m, I will try to make it PURELY my choice, otherwise I would rather throw it away.

MRbrownJAY: if the father NEVER cared for the daily upkeep of the kids, then i see no reason why he SUDDENLY thinks he can/will/should. if he was at work all day while mummy was the one running the home (and the kids with it), then there is no way he will get the kids......(even if the servants were probably doing all the work.

there is no reason why the children lifestyle should change, simply because daddy is bitter about mummy. come on bro, this school of thought is outdated!

I don't see why not, except there is proof that he would neglect it.

As I said, if the courts decide it is CRITICAL that they have a certain lifestyle, then it only makes sense to give them to the parent that can provide it.

MRbrownJAY: the fact that daddy paid for the house is irrelevant again, as we all know that it was paid with money that he made while they were together as a unit.....just like he would deserve half if she suddenly wins the Euromillion (even if he didnt help in buying the ticket, or choose the number).
the fact that you believe that the wifey didnt contribute to their success whatsover is far fetched. even if she simply fukced him royally every night, then she did her duty to make this union propser, and therefore deserve to get her fair share of the money that was made during their union........ at least 20% (IMHO), and thats why i say that 2% is bargain for this "billionaire".

He shouldn't deserve half from her Euromillions. That is rubbish!

The fact he paid for the house is relevant. He WORKED HARD for it! And you think it is just to simply take it from him and give it to someone else that did not work for it?

People should be entitled to what they worked for and the ability they have.

I hope you are aware, under UK laws, she is not "entitled" to take on any debt that is solely in his name?

You can only prove to me that the wife contributed to the success if you can prove:

- She contributed to the labour (e.g. the wife of the person that owned BET TV)

OR

- Without her, there is no way he would have made the money. (e.g. David Beckham would not have made that much money if he did not marry Posh)

Simples!

MRbrownJAY: he is going to lose the case, and spend much more money than what he initially was suppose to pay. bro, we are talking of 2% of this man's wealth (and thats ONLY if he was worth a mere £1billion). i dont think his wife is a gold digger, but even if she was, thats the price fools have to pay for not writing tight prenup. he took a gamble and lost, and now he wants to take another gamble?! remember that the wifey was asking for £40Milla, so the judgment "could possibly" go against him and raise up to whatever she was asking initially.

I doubt he is going to lose because he seems to be as smart and stubborn as I am. I think he has hidden his wealth well and there is no way the court can determine it and he will fight it till she is completely exhausted.

Even when they award her any money, I am sure he will claim he does not have such sums to pay.

Mate, I would rather throw away my money than give it to someone that is not entitled to it who thinks they can threaten me that I will lose more if I don't give them what they are asking for.

MRbrownJAY: recently i checked the housing market in London (one of the most overpriced in the world), and if thats where they intend to live, then they will need the best part of that £2.5 Million to secure a great home for this lady and her FOUR kids. let's remember that they would need to live in a safe, secure and decent environment deem fit for the children of a billionaire....also, you dont intend to send these kids go to some BS college in Streatham hills do you? so, as we know how much good schools cost in the UK, you should spare about £50K a year for all of these four kids (school fees, uniforms, school food, books, outings, pocket money etc) and i am generous!!!!...... if the lady didnt have any children with this billionaire, then i would understand to send her back where she came from, but you need to keep the standard of life that your children have, whether at mummy's or daddy's.

Mate, most part of London are safe, secure and decent. The ones that are not can be counted on the fingers of the hand.

I am sure one can buy a 8 bedroom house in Neasden for £1.5m and the area is very safe. I think you are mixing status up with safe.

The kids should continue going to the school and standard of schools they are already going to. If it is public, it should continue being public. If it is Eton, it should continue being Eton.

MRbrownJAY: whatever lifestyle these children had before the divorce, is what they should continue having, thats a very simple (and fair) policy.

the wifey is not really rewarded for the yrs that she sat down being pampered as the wife of a billionaire, most of this reward is for the UPKEEP and CARE for their kids. you need a similar decent place for them to live, you need to feed them whatever they ate before, you need to clothe them and give them the comfort that they had before..... this is a no brainer.
just because they live with their mother is the issue. if this husband can get to keep the kids then he wouldnt have to pay this lady that much.

It is a fair policy if you have someone monitoring that the money being exploited is being used for that.

Otherwise, if such lifestyle is THAT important, pass the kids to the parent that can provide that lifestyle.

I don't believe in "the best interest of the kids" BS policy. I believe in the "balance of best interest of and fairness to all parties involved" policy.

MRbrownJAY: many children of billionaire would.......believe that, especially if they were fed in silver spoons before.

No!

There standard of life will just drop slightly. They will not suffer. If you want to know suffering, go to East Africa or Makoko.

Furthermore, it is not the place of the courts or the State to dictate what standard of life children should have. That should be left to parents as long as it is above a basic threshold.

MRbrownJAY: yeah many women do use the money for themselves, but i doubt 2% is anything to brag about...and if the money is not spent on the kids, then let the guy sue her for that AFTERWARDS, but we cannot automatically say that this is what she is going to do with the money (thats like saying "all" ex wives use the settlement money on themselves rather than the kids....you know that aint true)

How would he prove it?

You think the Western courts have a process or care about that?

They are just happy robbing men because it has more political capital. He should fight it now, rather than later.

If the moronic Western government cared, there would have been request for invoices attached to large payouts in the first place. But let us not deceive ourselves, divorce laws in the West were, from conception, set up to be punitive and exploitative of men.

MRbrownJAY: he hands over the house to them so that they can stay in an environment that they are comfortable with (friends/school etc)......but if that guy rather pay the difference in CASH, then so be it....... she was awarded £20 Million settlememt in assets and cash, the house is irrelevant, as she could easily buy another one in the same area (if hubby really wants to keep the house)

And when the kids grow up and they and their friends leave school and move on, why is there no law for the house to be given back to the person that paid for it then? How come the women owns it?

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]See how you easy for me to steal from you everyday ($8000/day) and your rich self wouldn't even notice. lol

I don't even think the right world is "steal". I mean, my milky way and backyard keeps you energetic enough to bring in more millions, so it's like a mutual relationship. Half your millions is rightfully mines. I'm the one that keeps your head up high, the one that makes you feel good enough and the one that keeps you sane to do your business.



LOL don't worry. I know how to distract sagamite

Na to just the shake breasts anytime he tries to question me about some missing funds [/quote]Kai! This girl don read me finish!

ronkebp: For where be ready to see a big padlock on the checking and savings account. (agadangodo) for sure.

Sagamite cannot be robbed.

Married woman, no come spoil my market o.

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]As long as I can go in and out of your acct anytime. [/quote]That will not be a problem as long as I have access to your milky way and backyard every night.

Acidosis: Go to Abuja, you'll see what your literate pot-bellied civillians are doing with your money.

And that makes you sane and not a cretin?

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]God forbid!!!

I'd rather jump on your private jet to go to your mansion with you? [/quote]Feel free.

As long as you don't dream of being awarded the private jet or the mansion when we decide to pack it up.

MJB, by the way, £1.5m alone will buy you anywhere between 4-7 bedroom house in Maida Vale, Kingston, Hendon, Ealing, Chiswick, Epsom, Sunbury, Greenwich Village etc.

Quite choice areas without low-life crackheads.

I can't vouch for them not having rich crackheads though.

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]and what makes you think I don't love you na? [/quote]When you are ready to jump on Okada with me to go to the farm at 5.30 in the morning, that is when I would know you love me.

annawhite: My big head!

You have the smallest head in size and in proportion to your body in the pix of women you have on your profile.

Nothing is wrong with your head. You are yarning dust!

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]So how many millions?

I think I'm falling in infatuation [/quote]AHHH!!! Gold-digger!

That is when you will start emailing me and telling me you love me and have big bre[i]a[/i]sts and thick thighs.

MRbrownJAY: here is something to consider.....does this "wise" business man think that he will get a better deal if this goes to court? a better deal than 2% of his total wealth to be paid to his wifey? no court in the world will grant such pittance, and he should know that.....so to accept to pay 21Milla is the best decision to be made, in this case.

Well, the court is silly and the guy has decided to fight the silliness and seems to be doing a good job.

There needs to be a message sent out to gold diggers that some of us will not tolerate it and are stubborn enough to fight it.

MRbrownJAY: come on bro, you and i know that it has nothing to do with what she contributed, but more to do with all the years she has spent as this guy's wife. i am sorry to say that if you expect the best for your kids (aka a billionaire's kid upbringing) then they should be the same when they are at their moms.......unless you want them to live in some BS council flat in north London, with crack heads etc.

I can guarantee you from the bottom of my heart that kids with access to £2.5m lump sum and £35K a year would not end up in a BS council flat with crack heads.

Not even in a top-range council flat with middle-class people. You should know the council will not offer them the accommodation in the first place.

In my view and based on my philosophy of raising kids, the best for the kids is not to spoil them. What kids need is love, rational comfort, boundaries and mentorship. You don't need the $1000 a day the greedy gold-digger is asking for to give those.

Why should she be rewarded for the years being his wife? What will be used to reward him for the years being her husband? .........Robbing him?

MRbrownJAY: there are people who are living with a tenth of that in the UK, so should that be a reason to make your kids suffer, just because you are bitter with their mum? £2.5 Million would just about buy you a big comfortable home in a "safe" area of London, with a big motor in the garage. as for the £35K, is just an insult.

No child will suffer with £2.5m and £35K per year. Plus mummy's own salary.

This is not about being bitter with their mum. It is about their mum trying to use them to get money for herself. I can guarantee you most of the money will not be spent on the kids.

Another example is the lame excuse used by the courts to milk men: "The house should go to the wife in the best interest of the kids". If the house is to be used to raise the kids in the best interest of the kids, how come courts cannot make injunctions that once the kids are adults the house should go back to the possession of the husband?

Please lets cut this crap of using "best interest of the kids" to justify statutory, state-supported gold-digging.