Royal Prenuptual

[Anh map 2,098]

I don't think it's uncommon at all for Americans to believe that American norms are world norms - or at least should be

For instance when I explained that in an English pub you should always add 'please' when ordering a drink, she said 'Hell I am doing them a favor coming in here, why should I say please ?'

The culture differences are too may to note and are an expression of deep seated capitalist versus socialist ideas so that isn't really my point - I am more pointing out that the US media, whether they know that there is no such thing as an English prenup, will never make an effort to explain that. In other word the media are all about entertainment and making things up, rather than informing and educating and enlightening the public

Of course The Sun, The Mirror, and News of The World are beacons of responsible media.

Lots of variations out there in the media world all around the globe. Some good, some bad.

Some people have manners, some don't.

[Amby 490]

They don't work at all in England ... there is no half way - the English Courts are very jealous of their power to make the rulings they see fit and they will not allow themselves to be bound by these agreements which are not part of contract law

It's the same with the 'unfair contract terms act' - in the USA you can sign your rights away with the small print to a purchase of goods or services - in England the courts will set unfair contracts aside and then do what is fair

It's socialism versus capitalism basically. In the USA, property and contracts come first.

I got married in the USA the last time but I would not have dared propose a prenup - so I made other arrangements to protect my position. More than one way of skinning a cat.

A bit harder for Princes

Prenups are for Sicilian gangsters marrying dumb molls from Detroit and I reckon not many people would go with the idea of mixing love with legalities at the outset of a marriage.

One has to preserve the illusions that make life bearable and so protecting the wad by other means is always preferable

prenups are for people who have family money or have worked their a$$ off to make money. these people fall in love with someone but they are also smart enough to realize a large % of marriages don't work out. they don't want to lose everything they or relatives in the past have worked for just because their relationship has ended.

[Captain Oates 911]

Of course The Sun, The Mirror, and News of The World are beacons of responsible media.

Lots of variations out there in the media world all around the globe. Some good, some bad.

Some people have manners, some don't.

Bartender - gimme a shot of red eye

In the 80's I worked in the UK and I used to entertain a lot of staff from Georgia USA.

It was then that I noticed that they rarely said 'please' when ordering anything

It's one of the noted cultuiral differences in many films

On the other hand, when someone says 'thank you' to me, I don't say anything coz the Brits don't - in the USA I am supposed to say 'you're welcome'. That's just a cultural difference and probably comes from German immigration which has always been 50% more than British immigration and in Germany you do say 'thank you for saying thank you'.

So an American not saying please in the UK is not being rude - and me not saying 'your welcome' isn't rude either - its just custom

'Your welcome ' sounds awkward to me so now I say 'My pleasure old fruit'

Edited April 10, 2011 by Alan the Red

[mawilson 2,133]

'Your welcome ' sounds awkward to me so now I say 'My pleasure old fruit'

[Empress of Groovy 373]

I don't understand the point of this post. Is it just a rant?

It's one in an occasional series of Alan threads centering on the observation that lots of Americans are rude, ignorant, ethnocentric morons incapable of critical thinking. We know, Alan, we know!

[Captain Oates 911]

It's one in an occasional series of Alan threads centering on the observation that lots of Americans are rude, ignorant, ethnocentric morons incapable of critical thinking. We know, Alan, we know!

Try reading the thread first and don't give in to your prejudices

It's mainly about prenuptuals and the fact that American news channels deliberately mislead the American public about them not being legal in England. Hope that short summary saved you having to read back.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

I did read it. I tend to like your threads. The topics vary, but the theme is the same.

[Pooky 3,784]

Try reading the thread first and don't give in to your prejudices

It's mainly about prenuptuals and the fact that American news channels deliberately mislead the American public about them not being legal in England. Hope that short summary saved you having to read back.

Of course, it might help if Alan could spell prenuptial correctly, before he takes our Colonial Cousins to task about them not knowing that they're not legal in the UK

Edited April 10, 2011 by Pooky

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Of course, it might help if Alan could spell prenuptial correctly, before he takes our Colonial Cousins to task about them not knowing that they're not legal in the UK

I noticed that but thought it might be considered bad manners to point it out.

The real issue is, without prenups, how would English divorcing couples deal the issue of who would rightfully get that awesome Wills 'n' Kate fridge that's been getting so much attention? If I was on the losing end of that, I'd want to set fire to municipal buildings.

I thought I'd gracefully tie together this thread's discussion points with that fascinating scenario.

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

i've tried, really.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

(ahem)

It is correct to say prenuptial contracts are merely persuasive when it comes time for figuring out the financials during a divorce, Radmacher notwithstanding. Indeed, Radmacher isn't necessarily binding on lower courts, but directs courts to look at the fairness of prenups in a greater context of the financials of the couple. A hell of lot more weight is, as it has been in equity and in family law for some time, placed on what both parties brought to the table at the time of marriage, the length of the marriage, how disadvantaged one party will be post-divorce, how much monetary and non-monetary support the weaker partner provided, and the presence of children in the marital home, amongst other things. However, a prenup can tip the scales in a situation where there is considerable wealth on the table. Much in the same way that Commonwealth law can be persuasive but not decisive in the law of England and Wales, a prenup can be considered as part of the entire picture.

And just a minor, minor correction -- a prenup is not an illegal contract. Illegal contracts in English and Welsh law are fairly rare and fall under really specific categories. I'd bore you some more with this but I won't.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Wow, now that's geeky! Italicizing the case name and everything. Good work!

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Wow, now that's geeky! Italicizing the case name and everything. Good work!

It's good to know that law school allowed me to make geeky posts on VJ. My life is now complete.

[Captain Oates 911]

When I say 'illegal' I am writing shorthand for 'unenforceable'

If it was my money then opinions such as 'persuasive' or 'tending towards' etc would not be good enough for my peace of mind.

I remember all the US trash channels (HLN etc), pouring derision on Paul McCartney for not having a preenupshall and saying "You are a Beatle, what were you thinking of ?"

I think covert dispositions of assets (without offending Treasury and IRS rules of course) is a far better way to proceed and a far better way to spend legal advice money. Even Billy Windsor could do some of that. For instance, if I were to use some of my hoard at the Bank of England to buy property in England for my favourite daughter (on an 'understanding') then that would not be a recordeable transaction either at the Treasury or the IRS.

Also, maneuvering circumstances so that the man has a better claim than the woman (See Bungalow Bill - Liz Taylors Ozzy husband), is also sensible in these matters, but the poor US has nobody to put them right on these issues. CNN is now total reality junk and the others are not much better.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Empress of Groovy 373]

CNN has been deteriorating for a while now. Unfortunately, they've taken some tips from Fox News and feature ever-more "personalities" (i.e., shouting heads), entertainment fluff, and overall loudness. Fox still reigns supreme for fires, missing white girls, and garish moving graphics, tho.