Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by edesignuk, Mar 17, 2008.
Emphasis mine. Greedy bitch.
What a hero, she's going to make sure her daughter travels A class...
And she wanted £125 million to start with, the gold digging bitch.
I know, it's amazing. I somehow can't see Sir Paul letting his daughter want for anything. I'm sure he'd happily see Mills on the street, but he will make sure his daughter is looked after. In reality I'm sure she will actually receive far more than £35k a year, when schooling costs and "gifts" etc are taken in to account.
Bitch deserves nothing. The kid will be well looked after.
I think Sir Paul's lawyers have done well on this one. Bringing his worth down from £800 to £400 million was the kicker. One of his houses may only be worth £20 million as a house, but when it's Sir Paul's house all of a sudden it's £40 million. He's done well in that respect.
" A miner is involved in a cave in, at the hospital the next day he starts crying when he sees his crushed leg. the nurse asks what he's crying about to which he replies "I'm screwed, who'd be interested in a one legged gold digger?" The nurse replies "have you tried Paul McCartney?"
Oh, my sides. Aidez moi..
That is a great twist on this story.
Shemade ~$34k/day.....now that's some special &^%$....
Urgh, she's proved to be the gold digging cow everybody said she was in the first place..
Sorry, what's the hatred for her actually based on, apart from parroting what the tabloids have been saying?
She does a lot of work for charities, and Paul McCartney was the one who proposed to her and he was the one who filed for divorce, not her.
Or is it just a reaction to a woman getting a fair percentage from a marriage, any marriage?
I was supposed to go for an interview on tv tomorrow, and they cancelled me to cover this woman. Huh.
Heather, shut up and let other people have their 5 minutes of fame OK?
Watch some of her interviews on YouTube. A whiny porn star hiding behind charities is the impression I got. YMMV
"Heather Mills has been awarded £24.3m in her divorce settlement with estranged husband Sir Paul McCartney.
As part of the deal, Ms Mills will receive £14 million for herself and £2.5 million to buy a house in London."
umm..Where's the other 8 Million ?
I've seen clips of her, I don't find her particularly appealing as a person, but that's not the point. She was proposed to, her work for amputee charities is undoubted, she was then divorced... and besides, those who usually vociferously condemn porn stars on one hand are usually enjoying their wares with the other.
Maybe she does do good charity work, but I think my quote and specifically that which I bolded says a lot about her (of course I don't know her, but going on quotes). Just come out of getting £25m for a few years of marriage, and still has to bitch about how she's hard done by. I mean seriously, puleeeease.
Like I said, she's not the most attractive of people, but Paul McCartney knew exactly what he was getting into, and knew what a divorce would bring... besides, there have been some pretty odd allegations made about him so to my mind, they deserve each other.
I hated Mull of Kintyre.
I dislike Heather Mills likely. But, tbf, I dislike Paul McCartney just as much. Why he seems to get such good press is beyond me.
Hey, that was one of my first ever records.
I won it at a fair, along with a Sparks 7".
The bloody frog chorus or whatever it was is worse!!
How long were they married, anyway? I think any partner who puts their own career on hold in support of the other is entitled to a reasonable settlement if there is a divorce, regardless of how they are portrayed by the press. Of course, determining what is reasonable is the fun part.
In my case, for example, my wife encouraged me and provided much emotional support as I advanced in my career. I must admit that I'd likely not be where I am if not for her. She also halted her career to care for our child. Therefore, regardless of the money she earned during our marriage, she ought to be compensated if we divorce.
I'm not sure how much dear Heather contributed to the bottom line of the McCartney marriage, but I somehow doubt this settlement is completely fair to Sir Paul.
How, while Paul has been respectful, she's gone on TV trying to bitch about him...its just disrespectful. It also seemed like she was lying about quite a lot of the 'mistreatment' she endured.
No but I question how much of that cash was made during their marriage and how much was already sitting in the bank. I completely agree with her getting a fair share of what was created during the marriage. And her marketability went up leaps and bounds on marriage as well - can't imagine her on Dancing with the Stars etc without it.
I didn't have much of an opinion of her either way until the divorce claims went in for exorbitant amounts. She's got a 4 year old daughter who needs supported but why on earth does she need so much herself for 'support'? She can still work after all as she would have done if she hadn't screwed Paul.
I don't think I'm being overly harsh on her just because of the tabloids. Women who swan around doing sweet FA and expecting men to support them - not just now but for the rest of their lives - just get my goat in general.
She was awarded roughly 6% of his net worth after being married to him for 6% of his life. Not a bad deal for her.
My thoughts are the same as Applespider's - she probably gained more from the notoriety of the marriage than Paul did, and his net worth likely increased very little directly as a result of, or even during, their marriage.
Should Paul have been awarded some percentage of her earnings as a result of her income during the marriage? Was that even accounted for? I don't believe she "gave up" much in terms of earnings to support Paul.
But then again, he knew the risks entering the marriage. Apparently there was no pre-nup and this is the price he paid.
Doesn't bother me really... they're not taking anything away from me, and since I don't have a telly or read any mags or papers except the sites I choose to visit, it doesn't seep into my consciousness and get me riled. Same with Paris Hilton and others of her ilk.
Good on her; all the money in the world doesn't seem to have bought her many friends, anyway. I seriously wouldn't swap my life with hers, regardless of how much money she has.
What I am aware of is how the tabloids can build up and distort a person's image to such a degree that it becomes taken as gospel. I don't even care if people view her award as unfair; no-one said life was fair.
I'm sorry, but in what way is this a fair percentage? I strongly disagree with the vitriol spewed at Heather Mills, but I can not fathom how 24.3 million is a "fair" percentage, unless you mean fair in the ample sense.
Wonder if she'll buy any of the Beatles catalogue when it debuts on iTunes?
See emw's post above... seems OK to me, especially as none of us were privy to the judge's deliberations. £24 million in those circles isn't unreasonable.