Chicagoist: The Price is Right?

ross

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:35:03 -0600

It's not who is worth what it is how to split the joint assets. Her husband was an idiot not to have things set up so she couldn't tak3e half in the first place. He also could have settled with her out of court. Stupid people let the judge decide who get's what in a divorce. He probably low balled her in the first place at like 5 or 10 million. Instead of offering her 100 million. Then if she didn't except the judge would have probably sided with the husband and maybe gave the wife less for not accepting 100 million dollars. He is supposed to be a smart business man well he wasn't too smart in this case. Plus you don't know all the facts. Was he sleeping around on her etc.

Jim

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:09:39 -0600

"And is anything worth $184 million to begin with?" Depending on how big of a jerk/shrew your spouse has become, freedom could be well worth that and then some....

michelle

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:04:14 -0600

Not to argue for renumeration for housework exactly, but just to say if she had not been 80% time corporate wife, mother, homemaker who knows what she would have earned in the workplace? Every decision is a trade off and for couples who decide to keep someone home there is a implicit promise that, because you haven't spent 31 years working on your career I will take care of you financially. Since chicagoist already said there really isn't much worth $148 million why even debate sharing it with his wife of 31 years? He can put a tangible monetary figure to his life's pursuits but she can't, as largely she has been the housewife for their family.

Chi-Town Mama

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 08:26:48 -0600

I felt I needed to say something here. Being a mom is f-in' hard work. Unpaid, merciless, 24/7, tears, blood and sweat. People have tried to put a number on it, but you can't really: you're helping your kids and husband survive, helping them become participants in our capitalist democracy. It's important, vital work in our society. As a former teacher, I saw what happens to kids who are ignored or pushed aside-- it’s a shame, and it’s not pretty. A lot of moms stay at home so that their husbands can work, sacrificing their own goals for the good of their family’s well-being. The idea here is that, as a unit, this family earned the money over time: he, in the workforce, she, at the homefront. She should be entitled to something. Look at all her husband has-- she should be given some adequate compensation for her role in their fortune, and enough for her to live on. See, he keeps making money. This is all she has. Had she spent those years climbing the corporate ladder herself, she wouldn’t need the settlement as much. But-- she sacrificed, so she gets a payout. And “matty”? Seriously? Is that something you’d say to your own mom?

matty

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 06:55:32 -0600

She should have done a better job of not becoming old and ugly so he would have reason to stay with her. She should get nothing.

been there

Tue, 05 Jun 2007 20:03:39 -0600

This judge is on power trip.

geekgrrl

Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:29:12 -0600

oo. i learn something new every day.

marah

Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:27:03 -0600

for future reference, you're allowed to pick your own occupation when you go on jeopardy. i bet she would have picked "gallery owner."