Well, you just have to know by now that any article, which includes phrases such as

women are financial dummies

ain't gonna let men off the hook.

It's actually quite simple you see.

THey know that we males die, on average, 10 years earlier than them. So they don't need no steenkin' retirement plan! WE ARE their retirement plan! When we kick the bucket, they get OUR retirement plan...

And if that takes too much time, divorce us and take it! Voilla!

TMOTS

Quote from themanonthestreet

It's actually quite simple you see.

THey know that we males die, on average, 10 years earlier than them. So they don't need no steenkin' retirement plan! WE ARE their retirement plan! When we kick the bucket, they get OUR retirement plan...

And if that takes too much time, divorce us and take it! Voilla!

TMOTS

Cliff Richard once sang a song which contained these very wise words:

Son, you be a bachelor boy
Until your dying day........

Is there any way this is NOT about men being blamed but women being held accountable.

This is not the only research coming out to deter women from wanting to be housewives nor work part time. And they don't want for women to treat men as wallets. They want them to take care of themselves.

Not all of the wage gap is going to be about male and single females paying higher taxes to give money to women.

Women HAVE to start changing their attitudes is what all this type of research is being used for.

For equality to exist women have to start acting like men. Women have to start doing the investments and so forth. It will be looked as beneficial to men because then men are not considered walking wallets any more. Maybe this is welcoming research, if you look at it a bit differently.

From the article:

Divorce and separation can force women to abandon the chardonnay for the cask wine. Each year, at least a third of relationships end, with more than 10,000 married couples divorcing and many more de facto relationships failing. Although assets are split under property laws, women are usually worse off when a relationship ends, according to research by the Social Development Ministry last year.

My arse they are, it sounds more like Womens Affiars did the "research", of all the divorces I've heard about the women is usually the one that gets the lion's share of any matrimonial property, even if she came to the relationship with nothing.

Anna (not her real name) faced this scenario when her marriage ended three years ago. In her renovated villa with harbour views, life looks fairly comfortable. To some extent it is. She works part-time from home and her former husband pays $1300 a week maintenance, which covers most of the bills she faces raising two young children. But she's asking him for $12,000 to fix a leaking roof. Rates and insurance are a struggle. Anna got the house – the cheapest asset – but because she had signed a pre-nuptial agreement her former husband kept several other multimillion-dollar properties, including a farm and a Queenstown house, along with his high income.

NZ$1300 a frigging week??, BTW "maintanence" is PC speak for Child Support.
If she can't live on $1300 a week, I'd guess that she would need to look at her lifestyle.
I don't even make that amount a week and I seem to be able to live rather comfortably.

Quote from MikeT

From the article:

My arse they are, it sounds more like Womens Affiars did the "research", of all the divorces I've heard about the women is usually the one that gets the lion's share of any matrimonial property, even if she came to the relationship with nothing.

Well then, you must have a very cheeky arse. Our single parents group has a huge influx of men these days.

For the rest I cannot expect for men to be following up on what is happening for the women. But it will be a win - win. The radical feminists have been back in charge for a while and they have had to get themselves back on track. Believe me, this is not about blaming men. But who cares. What is in it for men? You WILL be better off.

investing in stocks is probably the worst thing you can do with your money.

It amazes me how many so-called "investors" and stock market airheads think the stock market is a legitimate enterprise. Any reasonable person with a basic education in mathematics would quickly notice that the entire stock market fiasco is a zero-sum game. For there to be winners and profits, there needs to be losers and losses. There's just no other way to get more money out of the stock market than what you put in without someone else losing all their money

There's only a limited amount of liquidity in the market, and to keep share prices up continuous money has to flow in from new suckers to prop up the prices and keep them there, otherwise the entire thing would collapse

the stock market doesn't create new money, it only redistributes the limited amount of existing money that is circulating. There's no other way to get more money than what you put in other than someone else losing money, or dumping their costs onto a newer group of naive investors who then have to dump their shares on to another newer group of investors and so on and so on, it's a very clever ponzi scheme that masquerades as a legitimate trade where anyone can make a fortune

many young people, particularly men, invest a lot of money in the hopes of getting a lucrative pension in later life, as their stock 'appreciates', but then they fail to see that not only is it a ponzi scheme, but that the direction of the stock is totally unknown. There's a good chance in later years the stock will be worth much less or hasn't appreciated that much, consequently they lose all their money or haven't gotten anywhere, due to the zero-sum nature of the game

the stock market is a trap for men as so many of them have been interested in it and had a passion for it before knowing about its ponzi scheme nature, including this user, alas many deny out of suffering the swindling nature of the entire enterprise, by then it's too late and all their money is gone

some men should learn from the more risk-aversive women who are uneasy about the stock market, though most of these women aren't aware of the zero-sum nature of the game, but nonetheless are more suspicious than the more passionate male trader

Gee did these dizy shitheads ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe mind you that there spending habits might be one of the main reasons why they are up shit's creek without a boat never mind the paddle?

Could it be that due to men's natral talent for math that they are better at manging mmoney resposabely?

Perish the thought that women are fallable when it comes to anything they do.

To the whining bitches that has spent their sorry ass into the poorhouse
" You watsing your money on yourself cenetered selves, you burshed off your husband and most likely took him for everything he had in order to suport you fantsy life of the rich and shameless, now that your ex has no job, has no more fincaly liquidy your gravy train has run out and you have the fucking gall to blame men?

Here's some adivce sweetheart, keep your back to the matteress like you have always done you two bit whore!


Hmm do any of you think that this post was a bit too harsh??

Quote from Kargan3033

Gee did these dizy shitheads ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe mind you that there spending habits might be one of the main reasons why they are up shit's creek without a boat never mind the paddle?

Could it be that due to men's natral talent for math that they are better at manging mmoney resposabely?

Perish the thought that women are fallable when it comes to anything they do.

To the whining bitches that has spent their sorry ass into the poorhouse
" You watsing your money on yourself cenetered selves, you burshed off your husband and most likely took him for everything he had in order to suport you fantsy life of the rich and shameless, now that your ex has no job, has no more fincaly liquidy your gravy train has run out and you have the fucking gall to blame men?

Here's some adivce sweetheart, keep your back to the matteress like you have always done you two bit whore!


Hmm do any of you think that this post was a bit too harsh??

Might want to work on your spelling a bit, math wiz.

Quote from TERA

Might want to work on your spelling a bit, math wiz.

Sorry that can't be helped, I have some disabilties that make spelling a real hassle ever since I was a rugrat, so look as the point get's across then all is well

Originally Posted by TERA
Might want to work on your spelling a bit, math wiz.

Quote from Kargan3033

Sorry that can't be helped, I have some disabilties that make spelling a real hassle ever since I was a rugrat, so look as the point get's across then all is well

Kargan, the onus shouldn't be on you to apologise, no one appointed Tera as head of the 'spelling police.'

Tera, I hope you feel really embarrassed now after Kargan's explanation? Resorting to attacking someones deficiency in spelling is puerile, spiteful and uncalled-for.

If you 'feel' a similar compulsion to repeat this in future, just stay logged off until you can input in an adult and constructive manner.

Quote from julie

Is there any way this is NOT about men being blamed but women being held accountable.

This is not the only research coming out to deter women from wanting to be housewives nor work part time. And they don't want for women to treat men as wallets. They want them to take care of themselves.

Not all of the wage gap is going to be about male and single females paying higher taxes to give money to women.

Women HAVE to start changing their attitudes is what all this type of research is being used for.

For equality to exist women have to start acting like men. Women have to start doing the investments and so forth. It will be looked as beneficial to men because then men are not considered walking wallets any more. Maybe this is welcoming research, if you look at it a bit differently.

I don't agree. At first reading it would appear to be another "male-bashing/women are victims" article to me..

You know the one, men have soooo good at it and women are really suffering because of it..

but this response really sums up the argument..

Baker, a Queenstown-based wealth coach, says: "I'd really like to go to a social function where the women are standing around sipping wine and talking about their investments like men do, rather than the next holiday they'll be going on."

As if there are not copious amounts of Women's functions already..

It just appears that women have different priorities and I have very rarely seen or witnessed anything different..

Baker, a Queenstown-based wealth coach, says: "I'd really like to go to a social function where the women are standing around sipping wine and talking about their investments like men do, rather than the next holiday they'll be going on."

In other words, "I wish women could be more like men."

Sorry sister, ain't gonna happen.

Every women needs someone to blame for their pathetic failures.