But I can't live on $43 million. My expenses are $53,000 a week

This woman gives gold diggers a bad name

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/604447

Guy who's in his mid sixties marries a woman in her mid thirties. Marriage lasts two years. Pre-nup gives her $43 mill if they get divorced. She says that's not enough.

(Marie) Douglas-David has filed court papers showing she has more than $53,800 in weekly expenses, including for maintaining a Park Avenue apartment and three residences in Sweden. Her weekly expenses also include $700 for limousine service, $4,500 for clothes, $1,000 for hair and skin treatments, $1,500 for restaurants and entertainment, and $8,000 for travel.

$4500 a week for CLOTHES!

 

Are you saying you reuse clothes? You Canadians sure are odd.

 

Times are tough all over.

 

I hate these stories. Who cares that the average household income in the US is $50k? It has nothing to do with this case.

The guy is worth over $300 million, she's probably not entitled to any more than she agreed to in the post-nup, but it's not unusual that someone would try.

 

So ... you're saying this guy is single now?

 

No, it's not unusual but it's a lovely example of both wretched excess and dumb men.

 

"not unusual" isn't the same a "morally acceptable."

 

yeah.. 43 mill is pocket change,,,

 

Time to use some of that money to build some more closet space. Really? How does someone spend $4,500 a WEEK on clothes!

 

I'm sorry, what is 'morally acceptable'? It's not about what you can live on, it's about what you're entitled to. We know nothing about the details of the marriage or the divorce, nor should we. It's a stupid story. Who cares?

 

Jesus, folks, this is a cliched story that plays out all the time: older rich man thinks with his dick, marries a younger woman who, to no one's surprise, wants a divorce a couple of years after tying the knot.

And 21 us right: it IS about what you're entitled to. Morality has nothing to do with it.

And yes, it's a stupid story about stupid shallow people. And yes, that's a huge presumption on my part but sometimes God is not in the details. Broad strokes work from time to time.

 

What she's entitled to is the prenup.

Talking about what her expenses are is trying to cheat a system that is vitally important to potentially battered wives everywhere. That is morally reprehensible, and all the attempted relativism of the interwebs won't change that.