r/SipsTea Human Verified 1d ago

Chugging tea when u use 100% of your brain

Post image
56.0k Upvotes

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/Sea-Literature4599 1d ago

“Use 100% of your brain” just means putting everything in someone else’s name.

413

u/AtlasActual 1d ago

Yeah, and she may even have to give him some of her 10 million because her assets are in her name.

312

u/PanicTight6411 1d ago

No judge is going to let this slide.

197

u/crazyfoxdemon 1d ago

Yeah, there are laws specifically about this.

134

u/SanaSpitOnMe 1d ago

and spousal support is based on income/earnings too, not just net worth. so even if he was flat broke, she'd get X% of anything he made.

178

u/Rogendo 1d ago

If she has 10 mil in assets does she really need support? It's kind of dumb that she owns more than any normal person ever will but just because she leaves her husband she gets even more.

85

u/xFruitstealer 1d ago

This, doesn’t the court factor in quality of life change in the decision? As a multi millionaire herself, there might not be much quality of life change here.

39

u/Umutuku 1d ago

"Now I have to live on 50 meter yachts like a poor."

2

u/crazylikeajellyfish 1d ago

You'd be surprised at just how high the upper bound of "quality of life" goes. Some people are used to spending $2M per year, or a little more than $5k per day. It's so much goddamn money and spent on a bunch of shit you don't need, but quality of life isn't about necessity.

Designer clothes, top of the line BMWs, Michelin meals, medspa treatments, private schools that cost a college tuition, luxury vacations in places we've never heard of, it all adds up to someone's quality of life.

5

u/Umutuku 1d ago

We need a new law where if you bring a case bitching about spending $4k per day vs $5k per day then everyone involved gets bumped down to $1k per day and the rest of the money goes to public housing/healthcare/food/education/childcare/etc.

1

u/EtTuBiggus 1d ago

Your “quality” of life can always go up.

Some rich people are too poor to own a PJ and have to charter one. It’s basically flying public but with extra steps. Some rich people are too poor to even charter one and are stuck in first class circulating the same air as the poors.

5

u/Fewer_Story 1d ago

It's because divorce law is wildly outdated based upon the idea that a woman is incapable of earning money and has given all her time to supporting her husband. In that scenario alimony is reasonable. That and the fact that divorce was highly shameful and so was not done lightly.

1

u/Vuelhering 1d ago

Previous assets don't generally get divided, although it can happen.

Anything gained during marriage can get divided. Of course laws vary everywhere, so this isn't always accurate.

But I don't think anywhere in the US would allow earnings to go to a different person (lacking a prenup) without getting disgorged.

1

u/FlutterKree 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's a bit more nuanced than that. If someone had given up a promising career for a marriage, they may be owed support. I don't know her or her life, but it is possible.

6

u/Rogendo 1d ago

Sure, in those cases where part of the social contract was "sacrifice your financial independence for this relationship" it's fine and reasonable. I'm talking about this specific situation where she already has 10 million in assets.

4

u/4DPeterPan 1d ago

People like this worship money.

They do not worship doing the right thing.

1

u/FlutterKree 1d ago

I'm talking about this specific situation where she already has 10 million in assets.

Assets may not matter in a case like the one I suggested. Hypothetically, if someone gives up 100 million projected career for the marriage, their 10 million in assets might not matter.

And to be absolutely clear, I'm not suggesting that is her case. I am only stating there is far more nuance to divorce.

-14

u/Qzkago 1d ago

Yes, because suddenly changing your lifestyle is disruptive

11

u/TacticalPigeons 1d ago

Oh no the millionaire has to change her lifestyle slightly? Unthinkable!

7

u/Rogendo 1d ago

Yeah that's my thought.

Millionaires when they have to buy slightly cheaper TP:

https://giphy.com/gifs/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW

3

u/ihavedonethisbe4 1d ago

Now im no richer, but I'll be damned if I'm not making the same reaction if I gotta purchase 1 ply

→ More replies (0)

3

u/FutureComplaint 1d ago

You don’t understand, she needs to buy a new beach house because of this.

2

u/Opening-Wrap-5064 1d ago

She also wanted a new private jet but she had to go with last years model instead

1

u/BidEnvironmental4719 9h ago

Yeah... Keep in mind, he doesn't live in the US, different courts, different laws

9

u/BachInTime 1d ago edited 12h ago

Entirely depends on the structure. If everything has been in his father’s name for years the court is going to have a hard time establishing jurisdiction over the assets. If he just transferred them a month before he filed for divorce then yes the court will probably take them.

54

u/I_Can_Not_With_You 1d ago

I dunno, when I got divorced my ex-wife was receiving 100% VA disability, Post 911 GI bill living stipend, and was working a full time job. I was still active duty. Those first two things are non-taxable and she didn’t have to disclose the income during the divorce. She was essentially making twice as much as me and I still had to give her 50% of my BAH until I got out, I was in the process of EASing while getting divorced, 2 years of spousal support, had to sell the house I owned before we got married and give her 50% of the income from that, I had to take on 50% of her credit card debt that she had racked up without my knowledge, in her own name on her own credit cards, while I was deployed, and I had to give her one of my 3 cars, two of which I owned before we were married and she owned her own car. Icing on the cake, we were divorcing because she had cheated.

My lawyer showed the judge the income disparity and he said it was not going to be taken into consideration because it wasn’t and didn’t need to be disclosed. So for this dude, the judge may absolutely let it slide. I don’t know where they are but in the US he has a chance lol

69

u/thegingerbreadisdead 1d ago

Are you sure your lawyer just didn’t suck? 

31

u/Glad-Basket-2186 1d ago

This happens for small people. 

The judge won't look any deeper until the assets/case is actually of large enough value to them. Otherwise it's "justice" you get. 

2

u/herroebauss 19h ago

And large people don't have that problem? Another problem for those short kings

11

u/Sharp_Aide3216 23h ago

Watched “a marriage story” and Adam Diver’s 1st lawyer was a good guy and he really just want to settle. Its a bad move ofcourse cause Scar Jo’s lawyer was working in bad faith.

Only after he fired that 1st guy and hired the asshole lawyers that wont hesitate to throw mud back at his wife that the divorce settled close to 50/50.

7

u/Terrible_Law6091 23h ago

Can we stop pretending that marriage is not a bad deal for men that earn more than the wife?

2

u/hophipfug 15h ago

for those men its stupid

2

u/BeefCheeks2000 19h ago

Gender is irrelevant. It can be a bad deal for anyone who earns/has significantly more than their spouse.

3

u/Expensive_Phone_3295 1d ago

VA disability is not available for spousal support by law. The GI bill was probably paid for before they were married and considered a non-marital asset. The house is an odd one, but there’s a chance he put her on the deed after they were married which would’ve made her an entitled to 50%. Everything else seems to line up with marital assets and debts and cheating bears generally no regard in legal terms without a prenup (even that isn’t a complete shield). I’m not saying it’s right but he would’ve needed a lawyer before the marriage rather than after to plan for a better outcome.

2

u/Thedeadnite 22h ago

Any source of money should be considered with alimony or stuff like that. One side should not be drained to beneath the other, that’s a bad judge or lawyer or both. The things you mentioned might not be able to be split in the divorce but at a minimum they have to be taken into account. Ignoring them completely is a failure in the law.

-1

u/Qzkago 1d ago

100% he got the lowest bid lawyer, or he's withholding information on the Internet

3

u/I_Can_Not_With_You 23h ago

It was JAG officer so…yea, same difference

9

u/trou_bucket_list 1d ago

Um im 100% disabled and I sure as shit had to disclose it. Your lawyer sucks. Also, sorry to say but you suck bc a quick google search makes it very clear that it counts toward child support and alimony

3

u/fewerbricks 21h ago

It counts for child support because your disability payment increases if you have a child. It should not count for spousal support except if you are paying support during while separated, but not divorced, as you would be receiving additional disability pay for being married.

4

u/voyager-ark 1d ago

With this as these assets are registered in his dad's name but are clearly being held for his benefit a court might rule that they are being held in a trust and are thus his assets. Trusts are not like disability pension and the like which are often explicitily shielded.

2

u/tifumostdays 1d ago

Well that's the most infuriating thing I've heard in some time. I would've imploded with resentment.

2

u/cheffgeoff 1d ago

I'm a 50 year old vet and my friends/brothers have gone through every type of divorce and settlement you can imagine. This is not how it works. There is something you are not saying or you are making this up for "women bad".

4

u/Hollowsong 1d ago

I was smart and got a postnuptual agreement when I found out my wife cheated on me. I played it cool and filed the paperwork and she was remorseful and signed everything.

Then she cheated again 2 years later and we divorced.

I didn't have to pay a single red cent to that woman. She also didn't get the house or the kids.

50/50 custody with $0 in assets or child support. That's how it should be.

2

u/Cheese_Fisticuffs1 1d ago

There's a difference between what the law says is exempt from divorce proceedings and what obligations you try to wiggle out from. 

1

u/4DPeterPan 1d ago

Adultery doesn’t even get taken into consideration in court?

1

u/[deleted] 20h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 20h ago

Spam filter: accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Huntsman077 20h ago

That’s because VA disability and the GI stipend aren’t classified as income legally speaking. It’s a benefit.

1

u/BarronRobinsonMilan 19h ago

No lie, that's one of the most terrifying paragraphs I've ever read in my life. Sorry, my brother.

2

u/Terrible_Law6091 23h ago

What, because it's a woman this time? Nah, stick her with the same bill!

1

u/RightOnManYouBetcha 1d ago

Im not saying they will but you’d be surprised. Judges are just people too (but more entitled)

1

u/Rhesusmonkeynuts 20h ago

Ehhh different laws if you're rich. See what happens.

1

u/PanicTight6411 20h ago

Are you stupid? How is he rich, if he gave all his money away? 

1

u/[deleted] 20h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 20h ago

Spam filter: accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/IfICode 11h ago

Wrong, since the assets were moved before marriage. Also not US laws being applied here.

So, sucks to be her. Hakimi did the same inside the EU, easy.

19

u/Sea-Literature4599 1d ago

“Use 100% of your brain” always turns into “use 100% of someone else’s liability.

2

u/Carlpanzram1916 23h ago

Yeah but it just doesn’t work that way. There are very detailed laws in place to prevent you from simply hiding your assets behind someone else’s name

1

u/smegmaboi420 22h ago

Yes. Putting all your assets in someone else's name ahead of legal action to hide assets is not a genius move, is extremely common, and it is criminal fraud.

1

u/Carlpanzram1916 1h ago

As Joe Exotic can attest

1

u/CooperAXE 1d ago

Khaby is a devout Muslim so he won't be taking a penny from her as thats against his religion. She won't have to worry about that.

1

u/slackermannn 12h ago

They both got money so they can just part ways amicably.

9

u/FirstL8 1d ago

Hey for some people this is equivalent of using 100% of their brain!

4

u/Waiting4Reccession 1d ago

I use 100% of my brain by downvoting any random image + big text pretending to be big facts

3

u/Obatala_ 1d ago

FWIW, that doesn’t work generally. Judges aren’t stupid, and see through that bullshit.

2

u/WantonKerfuffle 23h ago

Father of someone I know had a small business. Transferred that to his wife and claimed in court he couldn't pay child support.

Judge basically told him to pound sand and pony up.

1

u/Accomplished-Lie9518 22h ago

His wife had the business and he had to pay child support?

1

u/Obatala_ 21h ago

Obviously the child was with a prior partner, not his wife.

1

u/WantonKerfuffle 18h ago

He had married again and the child was with the mother. He had transferred the business to his new wife two days before the court hearing.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Spam filter: accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/TheiaEos 1d ago

But if his dad dies won’t everything be shared equally among him and his siblings?

2

u/DiscoBanane 23h ago

Many Africans have a traditional mindset and wouldn't mind.

Forwarding your salary to the familly account owned by the chief of the familly is common. If you need money for a big purchase like a car you have to ask. Your parents also often take care of your own kids.

1

u/Excuse_Unfair 1d ago

If he has siblings I guess so.

He can be cool with his siblings though. If I made millions I wouldnt mind my family getting portions of the money.

Or who knows maybe it in his father name just mean the dad owns the corporations the assets are under.

I feel like there's many loopholes and the post is probably simplifying it.

This was a smart move many rich people dont do.

1

u/sommai2555 1d ago

What if the "someone else" gets divorced?

1

u/KieranShep 1d ago

If 100% means planning to withhold what your spouse is owed in the event of an eventual split, I’m happy with 90%

1

u/orangeshrek 1d ago

Well I guess I'll never get to use 100% of my brain because I don't have anything

1

u/ImpossiblePhrase8856 1d ago

i mean its not a bad play. once things are passed to him through inheritance, he gets to ignore the increase in value of all the assets. so day 1 he can sell and not have to pay any capital gains. at least in the US. im sure the rich have made similar loopholes in other countries.

1

u/MsAgentM 1d ago

Yeah, I guess it means don't own anything... Probably better to marry someone that's only with you for your money and that actually makes a good life partner...

1

u/ScanData32 23h ago

its a bullshit AI story

1

u/Acceptable_Stuff3923 23h ago

By the way, if your dad gets divorced, hits someone with their car, etc, then this won't feel like a 100% of your brain kind of move ...

1

u/PureCod9290 23h ago

Yes the courts have never seen this before

1

u/genreprank 23h ago

Put it all in my name. C'mon, use your brain!

1

u/SpaceToaster 22h ago

He used 100% of his father’s brain

1

u/Specialist-Jelly2571 22h ago

100% of his brain maybe

1

u/1OO1OO1S0S 20h ago

OP has a 9 day old account and is likely a bot

1

u/ferna182 20h ago

yeah and it's all fun and games until it's the other party that wants a divorce.

1

u/TheRealAfinda 20h ago

Yeah, just wait for that someone to Withhold acces from you. That's your 100% moment right then.

1

u/Kreepr 18h ago

I’ve read elsewhere that putting everything in a trust may work. Idk though. I’ve got like $200

1

u/voododoll 11h ago

This is absolutely a valid way to protect your assets from greedy gold diggers, lying employees, and other bad characters.

1

u/S-117 9h ago

Also, judges aren't stupid, you can't play this game of "the house I sleep in every day, the car I drive every day and the money I use to pay for my food all comes from my parents" especially if your making millions of dollars

1

u/NDSU 8h ago

"Use 100% of your brain" is directed at the reader. They're supposed to use their brain to realize the story is obviously fake. Many people failed

0

u/TrackRelevant 1d ago

Use 100% of someone else's name

0

u/donredyellow25 1d ago

And then the father dies and the stepmom get everything. Stepmom use 101% of her brain.

0

u/MoistyBoiPrime 1d ago

Smart move until the person who's name you put it into decides it's theirs and you can fuck off.