brdawk20 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 At 20k a month for 18 years x 3 kids...It is just under 13 million.He made 80 mill (From the NFL) So...He had 67 million left over to scrape by. Not after taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I heard that someone near Iverson (accountant?friend?) actually put aside money that pays him an annuity of a fairly decent sum, so that he will never (maybe when really old) be totally broke. That's about the only way to avoid being truly broke and separate out some of that money so you have SOMEthing.But it is odd to lose that much, even with child support, you should be swimming in cash. I hear accountants blamed but at some point, maybe you just need to go to an old fashioned bank, sit down with someone and at least have some of your money set aside from unscrupulous 'financial managers'. According to Bernie his financial whiz, he will never be broke, Bernie that is. As for T.O., he's got ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 My husband & I have always said we wanna start a foundation. For the poor, and for the journalism that makes it real, and makes real people do something. I wouldn't know how to live any bigger than I am now, and trust me, it ain't high livin'. ---------- Post added May-9th-2012 at 09:00 PM ---------- Not after taxes. OK, let's go with 20? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Not after taxes. mix that in with bad investments, and there you have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 "The three women are identified only as Kimber, Monique and Melanie, and they all contend Owens is delinquent on child support payments and has little or no relationship with the kids. Owens responds that most of the $80 million he earned in the NFL was either poorly invested or squandered, and that he can't see his children because of his travel schedule and because they live in different cities, according to a press release from CBS." What a class act, regardless of whether the women were "Gold Diggers" or should have had abortions as some have suggested, the bottom line is TO fathered children by these women. They have his blood running in their veins. The children didn't do anything wrong except to be born to a man that doesn't provide for them"because he squandered away 80 million." The children also are at fault in his not seeing them because they live in different cities. They should know better than to cramp his schedule. Poor TO, always the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 "The three women are identified only as Kimber, Monique and Melanie, and they all contend Owens is delinquent on child support payments and has little or no relationship with the kids.Owens responds that most of the $80 million he earned in the NFL was either poorly invested or squandered, and that he can't see his children because of his travel schedule and because they live in different cities, according to a press release from CBS." What a class act, regardless of whether the women were "Gold Diggers" or should have had abortions as some have suggested, the bottom line is TO fathered children by these women. They have his blood running in their veins. The children didn't do anything wrong except to be born to a man that doesn't provide for them"because he squandered away 80 million." The children also are at fault in his not seeing them because they live in different cities. They should know better than to cramp his schedule. Poor TO, always the victim. ok, im not going to defend TO here or this situation but I always contend with stuff like this. Regular dudes have the same issue as TO does and they want to be apart of their children's lives and the women do not want that. Mostly because "they dont like them" not because they arent a potentially good dad or its good for the kid, it is because they do not like the dad. They also try and take the man to the cleaners regardless. Its never as simple as it seems. In saying that, TO is an idiot. I really fear for him in the future, that he may kill himself or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If I were Jeff Garcia, I'd grab my playmate wife, jump in my Ferrari, drive over to TO's flophouse, and shout,"who's the finocch' now, beyotch!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If I were Jeff Garcia, I'd grab my playmate wife, jump in my Ferrari, drive over to TO's flophouse, and shout,"who's the finocch' now, beyotch!" Lol, he should do crunches in TO's driveway while he's at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Robert Griffin Experience Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 >burn 80m in a few years >obviously TO's the victim here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 >burn 80m in a few years>obviously TO's the victim here I have yet to see anyone say that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 [ The children also are at fault in his not seeing them because they live in different cities. No, they are not at fault but the women could relocate, since the child support payments were fairly high back in the day. If it were that important. Also, what of men who are in the military for months and months at a time and rarely see their kids. He's not lying that his schedule meant he had less time to see them. Talk to dads who are travelling salesmen, stewards, pilots, merchant marine, etc. It's called providing for your kids, which men have done since time immemorial, often while rarely seeing them. Or should TO go get a job at Sears so he can pay less (he would actually not be allowed to do that, they would never change his payments quickly enough for him to not owe tens of thousands) and be near one of them? The bottom line is, the women are never held responsible for their actions. You really think any of them thought TO was going to settle down in whatever city they were in and become daddy? They are the gatekeepers. It was more important for them to be with a famous athlete than it was to find a more reliable normal (less rich, more boring) man near them who would actually marry them and be with their kids. That is their right to pursue such a strategy but we can condemn rules that incent them to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 ok, im not going to defend TO here or this situation but I always contend with stuff like this.Regular dudes have the same issue as TO does and they want to be apart of their children's lives and the women do not want that. Mostly because "they dont like them" not because they arent a potentially good dad or its good for the kid, it is because they do not like the dad. They also try and take the man to the cleaners regardless. Its never as simple as it seems. In saying that, TO is an idiot. I really fear for him in the future, that he may kill himself or something. Alimony, child support and visitation are three separate issues. I was discussing the latter two. In VA and probably most other states, if one does not support their children it does not give the person with custody the right to withhold visitation. Likewise, visitation cannot be withheld because one of the parties does not "Like" the other. In most proceedings that I have witnessed the court ordered the person with custody to allow the other parent visitation. Failure to do so results in a contempt of court charge. Now, separate of the visitation issue, I have seen the court order males and females to jail until what they owed in back child support was paid. No, they are not at fault but the women could relocate, since the child support payments were fairly high back in the day. If it were that important. Also, what of men who are in the military for months and months at a time and rarely see their kids. He's not lying that his schedule meant he had less time to see them. Talk to dads who are travelling salesmen, stewards, pilots, merchant marine, etc.It's called providing for your kids, which men have done since time immemorial, often while rarely seeing them. Or should TO go get a job at Sears so he can pay less (he would actually not be allowed to do that, they would never change his payments quickly enough for him to not owe tens of thousands) and be near one of them? The bottom line is, the women are never held responsible for their actions. You really think any of them thought TO was going to settle down in whatever city they were in and become daddy? They are the gatekeepers. It was more important for them to be with a famous athlete than it was to find a more reliable normal man near them who would actually marry them and be with their kids. I served in the military 28 years in war and peace and found time to visit my children. I also was in sales and did quite a bit of travel. The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters. Taking the wives, girlfriends or whatever one wants to call them out of the picture (as I am not defending them) the bottom line is that he fathered children. If he truly loves that which is part of him, he will see them and not make damned excuses. Does he expect them to hitch hike to see him? I could care less about the women. If he wants to be a father he needs to act like one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 So, he's broke and an *******. I really don't care what happens to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.