this is why some states won't even let you get divorced until you can prove that you've lived at separate addresses for at least a year. not fucking joking either
this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2024
718 points (98.9% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
92 readers
5 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' etc.
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
"I love this person so much I want to get the government involved."
I seriously don't get what people see in getting married.
Over 15 years married here. Companionship, support, shared resources, the naughty stuff, the security of those shared promises to each other. The only downside is that you can't just live for yourself any more, everything has to be negotiated, but that doesn't mean you can't negotiate areas of freedom.
Of course it's not for everyone, some feel they can achieve all the above by mutual agreement without involving any certificates or vows. Maybe for some reason they prefer a situation either of them can just walk away from.
OPs' problem is not marriage, it's the USA's completely fucked-up health system.
You can have all those things without marriage, though.
In reality it's about government benefits. It makes being in a long-term relationship logistically easier.
But none of that has to do with marriage, that's long term commitment.
I have all that without marriage. And you can walk away from a marriage any day of the week.
In the US: Emergency medical decisions/advanced directives, hospital visitation, postmortem decisions, much easier management of estate. There are lots more legal benefits, but that's a pretty big start.
Too few people have advanced directives. If you ever deal with a medical emergency or life-critical event, having these in place makes things a lot easier to manage. Marriage or affidavit of civil partnership is a shortcut for those things.
There's over a thousand legal benefits iirc. Things like being able to visit while in the hospital. It's ridiculous but it's not like there's no reason
load more comments
(2 replies)
only way my partner and I can live in the same country
Unfortunately, I had the flip side of this post, we were engaged to get married eventually if we ever got around to it/cared to. Flash forward 8 months and a medical emergency either woulda bankrupted her/both of us, or we get married and we can live with the deductible with her on my insurance.
Would've liked to avoid the paperwork, but life can be crazy like that sometimes.
Or maybe the place that has those awful requirements is the problem.... ?
But in Canada you have to prove that too, and we are free healthcare. I’m not sure why it’s like that here.
I was something like $250 over the annual income threshold to qualify for Medicaid for my first son's birth. My employer was "kind" enough to allow me unpaid time off long enough to get me under the threshold, but having an "all or nothing" threshold just to qualify was a little frustrating.
It is ridiculous that assistance programs are all or nothing. No, it is moronic. It damn near acheives the opposite of its intended purpose, to be a safety net or lift up so people can get back on their feet and prosper. Instead, it incentivizes people to remain poor if they can't manage a big enough jump in income to make up for the loss of assistance. You can pick up an extra shift here and there, or get a modest raise, and end up LOSING income as a result. That's absurd.
Those programs should gradually taper such that when you make more income at work, you always also still net more income overall. Past a certain point, instead of dropping to nothing, the assistance lowers gradually the more you make from other income. Progress is a bit slowed that way, but it is still progress, not a pit.
Instead, it incentivizes people to remain poor
As is intended. They know what they’re doing. The system didn’t end up like this on accident. Poor people are easy to control, and easy to exploit.
It’s ridiculous that we means test our safety nets at all, instead of providing for all and just clawing back from those who don’t need it at tax time, or giving people who make above a certain amount (like idk 150k single 200k married?) the option to pay it back through W-2 tax automatically, similar to claiming exemptions and stuff. It would be easier, and achieve the same outcome, but would help a ton more people, as targeted support tends to be socially stigmatized, in addition to nearly guaranteeing a life of extreme poverty to use.
Heck, with the number of people we need to handle current social safety net programs, there’s a solid chance it would be cheaper to just give it to everyone.
Morally speaking, I’m 100% with you
just clawing back from those who don’t need it at tax time
Would probably want to do automatic payment plans for a portion of the population
The hardest time my wife and I had financially was when we were escaping poverty. We made 2K to much the year my first son was born to qualify for any government assistance. My wife's main memories of when he was first born was of the endless stream of bill collectors calling in to demand payment. We were buying diapers instead of paying them.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
It was the same for a friend and the ACA, didn't make enough for subsidies and made too much to qualify for Medicaid.
I'm in a similar boat. I make enough where I don't qualify for the assistance but not enough to actually be able to afford health insurance. Instead I have to pay extra every tax season for being in a situation I didn't ask for.
I hate that this situation is even possible, but I just wanted to clarify that the individual mandate tax penalty has not been a thing since 2018. It was removed effective January 1, 2019.
Crazy to me that they can't just prorate it, like everything else in the world.
Republicans love adding poverty traps and means testing to everything. I don't know why this specific thing is like this, but I would bet money it's because a Republican negotiated it
Too bad the state will sue you for child support, and then keep all of the money since your wife and kid are on welfare.
Just get married again after the kid is born. Problem solved!
...
In the saddest, most depressing, way possible 😞
I'll take "why I'm not married" for 500 Alex.
Insurance is killing the marriage industry!
Marriage through the state is a trap. Not because wife bad. Because state bad
load more comments
(1 replies)
My wife and I have had this conversation trying to get services for our son with autism. I make too much to qualify for anything, but my companies insurance sucks so bad that I end up paying thousands out of pocket each month.
Can you not simply purchase a better plan from the ACA market? Not trying to be a smart ass, just curious.
When your pay is high the marketplace punishes you with higher rates and essentially forces you onto your employer plan. It’s not a real functioning marketplace
There isn't really such a thing as "good" in the health insurance market. It's all varying degrees of shitty
The worst/lowest cost plan with premiums and deductibles was about $1300mo
load more comments
(1 replies)
I've been in a similar situation and my experience was that the open market insurance was a worse rate than company insurance.
I know in Germany it's easier for a father when you are married but I think it's getting easier for unmarried fathers from year to year.
I believe Sweden has the best paternity leave for both parents. 3 years for each and they have an excellent healthcare system compared to the dumpster fire in the USA.
No Sweden has around a year to divide among the parents. After that, daycare is less than the stipend you get for having a kid.
As if the state doesn't heavily financially encourage marriage and having kids.
Divorce of convenience.
view more: next ›