Women will ruin their financial lives for kids

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/f37f322b-297d-3f0b-a2c0-22ddde80d55d/my-daughter-in-law-will-only.html

Apparently some dumbass guy paid off her student loans and credit debt of $250,000 and now moo wants sprog #2, but wants him to pay up for someone else to birth it

That was an expensive fuck!

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

Well it is certainly the Moo's right to choose whether or not she wants to have a second child herself or via a surrogate, but it is not her right to demand her husband use his inheritance to pay for it. If she wants to blow $200K to bake a second loaf in someone else's oven, then she better fucking pony up for it herself. She is not entitled to anything.

Sounds like maybe Moo had a "seal the deal" brat with the guy, but didn't like being pregnant and giving birth, so she'll give him his coveted second kid if someone else incubates it.

He already gave her $250,000 for her debt and she probably wants to get her hands on as much of what's left as possible. The fact Moo is throwing a shitfit when he wants them to sign a pre-nup so he can keep his remaining money AND the fact she wants to sink money into a house (which will become "ours" and not "mine") is pretty telling.

I don't care how nice she is and how good she is with her daughter, bitch is a gold digger and sonny boy fell right into her clutches. He would do well to tell her to take her surrogacy plans and fuck right off with them. But given the fact he already gave her a ton of money to pay off her debts for her, my guess is he'll pay up to keep her around because she's such a good mommy to their baybee. Just wait until she blows through all his money - she'll drop him like a hot frying pan, divorce him, take half his shit and take the kids so she can get child support too.

He paid her $250K in loans off THEN he inherited 1 million dollars at 30 years old. His moron moo says a million dollars is only enough to buy a house and pay for college for brats in this day in age. He must not have inherited the money from her because she is financially illiterate. If he invests just $200K of his inheritance at 8% in index funds for 30 years he has 1 million dollars and either an early retirement or a huge contribution to his retirement. There is no need for him to spend all the money now. And a million dollars won't buy a house in San Francisco anyways.

His moron wife smelled the inheritance and she seems to be doing whatever she can to get her paws on it, including trying to get him to buy an expensive house because they are in a community property state and if he puts the money in the house she has a much better chance of getting her paws on it.

Apparently moo wanted to be a yoga instructor after racking up over $200K in student loan debt and turning down a full ride scholarship. Did they ever have conversations regarding money while dating?

I'd guess he is sick of his in-laws living with him because who wouldn't be sick of five people in a small apartment. They show no sign of independent living and are likely asking for money all the time. Does he really want another kid in addition to financially supporting his wife and her parunts? I wonder if her parunts are as crappy with money as she is? Something tells me indeed they are.

Quote

That was an expensive fuck!

I used to work with a woman who used to say, she must have a snapper down there.

It sounds to me like sonny boy is pressuring her for another kid. Who knows what kind of pregnancy she had the first time and I love the cavalier attitude from the Moo In Law, who is clearly taking sides:

Quote

It turns out that his wife, 35, is very reluctant — not to have another child, as she claims, but to bear another child. She says she would agree to surrogacy at a cost exceeding $200,000. She claims this is her right, as a feminist, and that she is entitled to control what happens with her body.

Pregnancy is a miserable experience for some women, so maybe her position isn't out of line. Who knows.

Nevertheless:

Quote

He paid her $250K in loans off THEN he inherited 1 million dollars at 30 years old. His moron moo says a million dollars is only enough to buy a house and pay for college for brats in this day in age. He must not have inherited the money from her because she is financially illiterate. If he invests just $200K of his inheritance at 8% in index funds for 30 years he has 1 million dollars and either an early retirement or a huge contribution to his retirement. There is no need for him to spend all the money now. And a million dollars won't buy a house in San Francisco anyways.

It was a generous gesture for him to pay off her loans. (See snapper comment.) However ITA with this. Wifey sounds just as financially illiterate as Moo In Law. Financially smart people look at a windfall like freya's example above. People who blow all their lottery winnings think like the Wifey. They do not see the money as an opportunity to live better in the future, but something to blow as soon as they get it. And paying for surrogacy to create another, future $300,000 liability? Madness. If you took $250k and flushed it down the toilet, at least you'd be limiting your liabilities, not creating another money suck in the form of a kid.

And at the end of the day it's the son's right to decide what to do with his inheritance. He had better not co-mingle it in California, however.

It sounds as if he's following this article's advice to the letter

https://www.ratzerfamilylaw.com/2020/07/is-my-inheritance-considered-community-property.shtml

I'm double-dipping here because the Moneyist column that is referred to in the yahoo article is a treasure trove of problems, many of which are related to Breeding.

The woman who is writing for advice in this link rivals Breaking Mom for dumb decisions:

1. sold her house and made a geographic move for a man she calls her "fiance"
2. bought a house with him
3. now pays half the mortgage on said house and half the living expenses

She initiated a conversation about a will, and said she wanted to leave the house to her kids, and the guy said he wants to leave it to HIS kids. (Did these goobers ever talk about these scenarios before they bought a house together?) They both sound like assholes who don't realize if you half own a house as unmarried people, you can probably decide what to do with your half and that's it.

He is now demanding that she quit-claim the house over to him or else he won't marry her. And he wants her to pay "rent." She's making him sound like an asshole. What she's not saying is how much she contributed to the down payment. If it's nothing, then he should not have put her name on the house. Asking for a quit claim would be one thing, but she's been paying for half the house for a year.

I'm thinking, why is she still with this guy? I'd be gone and demanding that he sell the house.

At any rate it's a mess and see point above: they should have got some counseling before they did this as a couple.

Quote
bell_flower
The woman who is writing for advice in this link rivals Breaking Mom for dumb decisions:

1. sold her house and made a geographic move for a man she calls her "fiance"
2. bought a house with him
3. now pays half the mortgage on said house and half the living expenses

It sounds as if she may have been the only one who gave up a house to move to the coast with him. I'm wondering if the down payment on the house was 100% hers. I also suspect neither may be able to afford the house payment on their own, especially if she had lots of equity in her former house that was a hefty down payment.

Best case scenario is he was totally ignorant (and happy to let her help pay for the down payment and monthly payments) and after their recent conversation he researched and figured out what was happening. Worst case scenario is he fully orchestrated this house ploy and simply waited until he felt stable after a year of mortgage payments to bring it up to her. If she did put down the proceeds from her house as collateral towards their house and he expects her to forego this then that is a huge red flag. Her letter has a non-committal tone and it is tough to figure out the facts (other than he doesn't want to marry and she pays 50% of everything) because it is mostly implications. Who knows how much equity she had in her former home? And he may have contributed funds for the down payment from another source.

They both seem clueless and what woman in this day and age sells a beautiful home to move across the country (which she thinks of as a sacrifice, this was clear from her letter) with a man who doesn't want to marry her but is happy to let her pay 50% of rent? He is a roommate with benefits. I'm not sure he had any skin in the game based on what she wrote, so why would he feel the need to add some now? She sold her house and followed him and pays half the bills! He may have thought she would sign over the house to him because she seems ready to sacrifice quickly for her forever fiance.

And she seems to be in serious denial about their relationship, she seems to think he will "come around" to the idea of marriage. Most people do not refer to their significant others as a fiance unless they are engaged and intend to marry.

They both have kids and they are discussing inheritance. I've yet to hear people under 30 discussing what they will leave to their offspring, it just isn't a common conversation in that stage of life. If someone under 30 is discussing inheritance it is likely what they will receive, not what they will leave behind. So they are likely closer to retirement age and how does this happen at that age?