Post: #51

Prenup is life.

Post: #52

(11-16-2015 09:39 AM)The_Don_Führer Wrote:  Why the fuck would you get married if you think there's a chance the bitch will take your shit?

If you aren't 100% positive that the marriage will be or life, it probably is a risk you shouldn't take.

And even if you are 100% positive: PRENUP

Also, here's a.... DON-STATUS BONUS TIP:

1.) Set up a holding company in Panama, then open a LLC in Wyoming or S. Dakota (these states allow you to register a LLC with complete anonymity and have no personal or corporate income tax).

2.) Issue all shares to the Panamanian company. It bills your LLC for "services", "rent", "marketing", etc.

3.) Pay the Panamanian entity from the LLC.

**At years end, there is no income, assets, etc. available through the US company. The holding company holds your interests and assets. Since it never does business except with companies it owns, there is a massive firewall between your money and any potential liability in the US.

Divorce the leech, keep your money while laughing all the way to the bank. Rinse, repeat ;D

Disclaimer: I dunno how this would work for Canadians or anyone else...

- The Don

Got an even snazzier addition to your post. Set up an LLC in Delaware, not only does that state offer complete anonymity, BUT it also allows you to register it as a "Foreign LLC." Yep, a true foreign entity on US soil. Best of both worlds.

Post: #53

(11-16-2015 11:56 PM)Ingocnito Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 09:39 AM)The_Don_Führer Wrote:  Why the fuck would you get married if you think there's a chance the bitch will take your shit?

If you aren't 100% positive that the marriage will be or life, it probably is a risk you shouldn't take.

And even if you are 100% positive: PRENUP

Also, here's a.... DON-STATUS BONUS TIP:

1.) Set up a holding company in Panama, then open a LLC in Wyoming or S. Dakota (these states allow you to register a LLC with complete anonymity and have no personal or corporate income tax).

2.) Issue all shares to the Panamanian company. It bills your LLC for "services", "rent", "marketing", etc.

3.) Pay the Panamanian entity from the LLC.

**At years end, there is no income, assets, etc. available through the US company. The holding company holds your interests and assets. Since it never does business except with companies it owns, there is a massive firewall between your money and any potential liability in the US.

Divorce the leech, keep your money while laughing all the way to the bank. Rinse, repeat ;D

Disclaimer: I dunno how this would work for Canadians or anyone else...

- The Don

Got an even snazzier addition to your post. Set up an LLC in Delaware, not only does that state offer complete anonymity, BUT it also allows you to register it as a "Foreign LLC." Yep, a true foreign entity on US soil. Best of both worlds.

Unfortunately OP seems like a woman in that he/she/it/(all of 'em) doesn't seem to want advice, but wants you to sympathize with their dilemma.

Reminds me of when Rosie Perez told Woody Harrelson she was thirsty after sex in "White Men Can't Jump"

*BOOM* Roasted.

- The Don

Edit: Thanks for that information, though.

Post: #54

(11-16-2015 08:05 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 12:27 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  Basically.

This post was inspired by that scarcity mentality that permeates all LTR discussions.

I can't imagine that all these smart men can't see the writing on the wall.

If you follow their logic,
- majority of marriages, here and often abroad end
- asset protection schemes are either scams or ridiculously difficult to make practical
- women brought here will be corrupted
- women in desirable countries will eventually fall to either feminism or technology

Where is the abundance?

Macro and micro forces are eating away at objective abundance.

The very thing that most guys want is clearly not possible, not in the long run.

Okay I'm starting to get a somewhat more clear view of what you are looking for.

The issue you touch upon here is LTR/Marriage in the West versus other places with women who are less of a personal and financial liability. Its generally believed in this community that women that are raised in more tradition cultures (Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, South America) are a safer beter and far more "wifeable" than a standard American, Canadian, Australian, British, woman.

No one has a scarcity mentality when talking all starry eyed about foreign girls from cultures with more tradition family values and sensibilities. In that regard, I believe the "abundance" comes in where dudes around our circles in the West who want a wife/LTR are pretty well understood that they could just move to a place with women who are more suitable for that. I think I can speak for all men when I say if we want a wife then there are millions of them in SEA, EE, and SA.

Now, if what you are implying is that any view of scarcity of a specific thing in a given environment is weak then I think that is akin to relating every little thing to alpha/beta dichotomy and is just a little absurd. As intelligent men we have to be realistic and objective. Statistics, history, and overwhelming personal experience and evidence show that finding a suitable long term partner for settling down and raising a family in much of the Western world is a fool's errand; therefor we don't do it. We use the resources we have for what they are.

Having lived in Europe...I would agree that finding a more traditional girl to marry in other parts of the world is so much simpler...of course I'm not sure if dating/marriage in the Western World has ever been easy.

Here's some interesting statisitics I found:

http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=b...men#_edn16

Percent of births to unmarried women:


A majority of unmarried births now occur to cohabiting parents. Between 2006 and 2010, 58 percent of unmarried births were to cohabiting parents: in 2002, the proportion was 40 percent. Children born to cohabiting parents are more likely to see their parents eventually marry than are those born to non-co-residential parents. Nevertheless, children born to cohabiting parents experience higher levels of socioeconomic disadvantage, and fare worse across a range of behavioral and emotional outcomes than those born to married parents.

It seems with "modern" marriage becoming more difficult...people are actually reverting back to the days before you had to have a marriage license...for centuries people have basically been living together and raising their kids without an "official" marriage. It seems after nearly 300 years, people are going back to that tradition...