Its not who you are, its what you do and what you earn?

[Jay Cutler]

Jay -

 

 

 

Do you have a link for the data? I once read that educated women have HIGHER divorce rates than non-educated women. Educated here meaning college, grad, and post-grad.

 

link removed

 

link removed

 

link removed

[jellytot]

I dont care, If theres love, thats all that matters. Id rather be on the side of a street with a man I love, and who love me back, than anywhere else in the world.

 

Its all about love. If my man lost both legs and arms... I would still want him, regardless, same as money, it means jack sh*t to me. Its a bonus, yes, but love, unconditional love, is all you need.

 

Like John lennon says..

 

All you need is love....

 

Just my five cents

xxx

[TANKGRL]

I whole heartily agree!!! Money doesn't matter. People need to get that out there heads. People are always obsessed with owning tons of crap. Own tons of crap doesn't mean you are a good person or a good provider.

 

Being able to take care of some one's health and making sure they are clothed and have some sort of a roof over their heads is PROOF that you are a good provider. Some people will always be shallow and judge a persona based on their income and job.

 

I don't work, my boyfriend does and he makes only 15 an hour. He has a roof over our head and 2 cars and we both have our own computers. We have plenty of food and clothes. Anything we need we get. Money doesn't come first. OUR health does. I don't care if he is as broke as a joke, we lvoe each other and we can take care of each other.

 

People really need to stop being shallow and raising their kids to be shallow. No wonder this world is pathetic and doomed!!

[Batya33]

Even if it is "shallow" (and I completely disagree that a desire to have a nest egg of savings and be able to provide financial stability for yourself and your family is shallow in the least) my guess is that you have at least some criteria for a mate that others might label shallow - perhaps it has to do with looks, perhaps taste in music or similar, but I wouldn't be so quick to criticize others for being "shallow." I'd far rather be labeled "shallow" than have a shallow - or empty - savings account, that's for sure.

 

And - my other guess is that given what your income and assets are you don't have much money to give to charity because your money goes to making ends meet. I am not criticizing your financial situation at all but note that without people who make more than just enough to scrape by, there wouldn't be money for the many charities there are. I wouldn't call your lifestyle "shallow" but perhaps you might want to think twice about whether giving to charity is a "shallow" act -- and whether it is so "evil" to want to make enough money to save and also to contribute to those in need.

[Cimmie]

Even if it is "shallow" (and I completely disagree that a desire to have a nest egg of savings and be able to provide financial stability for yourself and your family is shallow in the least) my guess is that you have at least some criteria for a mate that others might label shallow - perhaps it has to do with looks, perhaps taste in music or similar, but I wouldn't be so quick to criticize others for being "shallow." I'd far rather be labeled "shallow" than have a shallow - or empty - savings account, that's for sure.

 

Actually I agree with you Batya, having tried to live on love and idealism and having learned the hard way.

 

I think most people realize this in the end. I'd far rather be old and alone and comfortably-off than old and alone and penniless.

 

Unfortunately love isn't all you need. To quote Joan Rivers: 'forget the orgasm, get the fur coat'

[Mavis VDSande]

This is a really interesting topic!

 

I know that even though my bf is not earning much, and currently not seeing career stability I was attracted to his intelligence, ambition and creativity. At the end of the day I don't care if he's got an average, uninspiring job if he needs to make ends meet and pay the bills - I know that he would develop his passions in other areas of his life anyway - take up a great hobby etc, be proactive in the music community - because he's naturally like that. In this sense I know that I'm with him for who he is, not what he does. Although having said that we have spoken about our need to start earning serious money, because we understand that in order to create a sucessful future together we need the bread & butter, we need to be able to pay the bills - but do it, doing something we love.

 

I agree with Shes2Smart - I expect that I will be able to take care of myself, and that I will be financially independent. Therfore I don't pressurise my bf to be the provider, because part of my goals is to provide for myself.

 

Also everyone has different aspirations - and to judge what they are doing without considering what they want in life is to me, shallow thinking. Someone mentioned their parents owned a cafe. There's nothing wrong in that - some of my friends have set up cafe's and they have aspired to do this. But if you've been working in a cafe for like 6 years and what you really want to do is something else, you must pursue that, or at least try. I like to think that my friends are go getters and they are pro-active in pursuing their dreams. Again, it's about the person and heart, not what they do. So if you're put off by a date who works in a supermarket to make ends meet but are studying at night to be a vet, you've got to be pretty shallow not to be able to appreciate their ambitions and what they're trying to achieve.

 

One of my friends use to actively pursue rich dates. Everytime she met a richer man "he was the one". I asked her once - if he wasn't earning that much and didn't have his own condo would you put up with the way he's treating you now? And would you love him less? She honestly couldn't answer - she just said "I like ambitious men who want power, and of course I would still love him because what the hell would he be doing if he wasn't making money?". Unsucessful men were unattractive in her eyes - but it was because she wanted to associate herself with wealth and power (perhaps because of her insecurities), but in the end, she came to understand that it's about the person, not about their pay packet.

 

Another one of my friends was going out with someone you might say "did not match up to her intellectually", he worked in a cardboard factory and he honestly thought it was the best thing ever. But her parents dissaproved and she suggested he do something more community inspiring - so he joined the police force - and now he's really passionate about it and he's doing really well. He just never realised he had that potential to get out of the factory I guess.

 

A job is a job, a vocation is something different. And I think when you ask "what do you do?" you have to ask also "so what inspires you and what do you want to do?". If someone is being proactive in pursing what they want realistically, and you can understand where they are coming from then that's great.

 

I also don't think it's a sin to give the answer "I'm working in a cafe, but I'm not sure what I want or where I want my career to go". That does not reflect a lesser person. It takes time for people to find their feet.

[poloplayer]

Jay -

 

Thanks for the links....I could have sworn that I read otherwise elsewhere, but I guess not.

[TANKGRL]

To tell you the true we donate alot of money to charities. We also do have a savings account which we do not touch unless we feel like getting something we need either being new clothes or a new car part. We are both gear heads and do occasionally spend a little(what we get always betters us). I never said contributing was shallow. I was saying basing a relationship on money IS shallow get your facts straight and maybe YOU shouldn't be so quick to judge.

I also do NOT base people on their looks as others may do. I love people for who they are and generally accept everyone... unless they are a murder or cause some sort of harm to others.

[Batya33]

Oh - you misunderstood my post. I asked you if you based attraction for romantic purposes based on looks at all - my guess is you do or have some criteria where you need to be attracted to the person in a sexual way (but perhaps not). I don't base a relationship on money and I don't think anyone here that you judged was saying they did. Rather, financial stability is important to a long term relationship particularly if there are children involved. It sounds like you don't have children at this time.

 

As far as buying material things that "better" you it sounds like you have a different standard when you judge your own financial situation (from your post it sounds like, unlike your previous post) you do care to an extent about money and being able to buy material things. So we all are in agreement, other than you think that caring about financial stability beyond putting a roof over your head and staying healthy makes you shallow while I do not. I guess you are saying that buying things to satsify your "gear head" interest (whatever that is - I am not familiar) "betters" you and thereforeeee is an exception to your "caring about money beyond food, shelter and health is shallow." Interesting way you evaluate your own situation.

 

Good luck!

[CaptainPlanet]

Mavis VDsande is very smart.

[poloplayer]

Hi -

 

I agree with Batya. It's not a black and white issue as to whether someone is rich or not, it's more along the lines of a long-term provider; a very gray area and tougher to describe in words (for me at least).

 

In its purest sense, love is idealistic. But we also have a reality called life, which requires some sort of basis or foundation of financial stability and growth. I think that a part of realistic love does consist of money - what can you provide for her and your family? It doesn't mean you have to be rich (that's a bonus), but you do have to be well grounded. I think responsible is the best word I could use.

[Mavis VDSande]

Mavis VDsande is very smart.

 

Oh thanks! Really?

 

Anyway - I think that money has become a dangerous game in society. Money isn't a tangible, physical concept anymore - it's become an ideal as much as a practical asset. We associate money with wealth, status and success. We can't help it - we even spend money emotionally without understanding what it's doing to us (I know when I'm feeling low all I need is a bit of retail therapy to perk me up, or the countless £££ coffees I treat myself too, even though I'm being broke, doing research in a cafe!).

 

Money and the evolution of society

 

So for different people the measure of success and wealth changes. For someone success is being a good pastor, others is having a lot of property to show for, for me it's about being successful in pursuing things that you want in life - whether that's more money (!), a better job, or having better rels with others.

[Mavis VDSande]

Unfortunately when considering someone to date/go out with you need to know that they can be a provider otherwise you'll be stuck with all the financial aspects - unless you're fine with that.

 

The main thing is - can they provide for themselves in this life? Can they be independent from ther parents or others? Do they share the same ambitions as you and can you see a development on that front?

 

My aunt and uncle are so loving and close - but when she first started dating him, she said that she was grateful that our grandad accepted him even though he was in debt, broke and had nothing to show for. The reason though, to why my uncle was accepted was that he was ambitious, he wanted to provide for my aunt and he had realistic plans to get his dream job and there was potential. Everyone could see that he wanted these things.

[Batya33]

Absolutely someone can have potential and realistic dreams and demonstrate the steps he or she is taking to reach those dreams. But, for example, if I met someone now who was in his first year of medical school (or applying to medical school) and then, after medical school wanted to get a Ph.D. to pursue his dream I would be very impressed. However, I probably would not date him (probably, not definitely) because at this point in my life I cannot support myself, a full time student and a (potential) child for the next dozen years that it likely would take for him to finish all those studies and have an income (let alone not have major loans). If I were already married and he wanted to do that I would hope that we would discuss it as a family and take into account finances/stability.

[Jay Cutler]

In its purest sense, love is idealistic. But we also have a reality called life, which requires some sort of basis or foundation of financial stability and growth. I think that a part of realistic love does consist of money - what can you provide for her and your family? It doesn't mean you have to be rich (that's a bonus), but you do have to be well grounded. I think responsible is the best word I could use.

 

Completely agree with this. Tying this into divorce rates, family income is an indicator of divorce rates which makes sense if you think about it. When your'e living paycheck to paycheck, it puts so much stress on a marriage. Not saying you have to be wealthy, but being financially stable certainly helps to make a less stressful and more stable marriage.

 

Besides all that, with college education, housing, etc costs being so high these days, how can you not look at a potential partner's finances?

 

In the end, it is indeed a gray area as to what constitutes materialistic and what is merely realistic thinking.

[CaptainPlanet]

There was a study in Australia and it indicated the necessary income for a family to be happy was combined income of 90k, i.e 2 parents each on 45k. For example two school teachers would have plenty of money.

 

Don't quote me i just remember hearing about it a while ago.

[TANKGRL]

A gear head is someone whose into cars. My boyfriend and I work on cars together. When we purchase a part for the car it's to replace an old one...either because it has failed or is close to failing. I don't think all people are shallow. BUT I do think people who are stuck on themselves and people who think money is the only key to happiness ARE shallow. I DO NOT base people on there looks (I have said this twice now I do believe lol). Attitude and personality is what makes a person. Looks at just what you see. There's more to a person then looks. Some good looking people need to keep their traps shut because they are idiots...some unattractive people have beautiful minds...(I am basing this on what the world seems to think is attractive and not attractive). If I date someone it's because I got to know their personality. I do however think I have an attractive boyfriend... it could be because I am absolutely head over heels in love with him... or it could be that he is actually attractive. I do however like eyes. But I don't base a person on their looks, it's pointless and you end up missing out on meeting an amazing person. I could careless about being rich. We have enough money to eat live and do whatever we want. I would never only date someone because they were rich. My boyfriend gave me a roof over my head and he bought me clothes and he takes care of my health. YOU don't have to be rich to do so. Gold Diggers...(people who date for money) are shallow...they only do things to better themselves and with * * * * others over in an instance. I AM not a person like that and I DO NOT like people who ARE like that. Those are people I would never or could never be friend.

[Batya33]

Then we are on the same page. I also don't base attraction on looks and I don't base relationships on money, nor am I interested in whether a person has a lot of money. I do however require financial stability (generally speaking) in someone I would marry and raise a family with. I don't date just to date, so thereforeeee I would not date someone who was not financially stable, unless it was a temporary situation.

 

I also would not date someone who didn't have compatible values to mine when it comes to work ethic and ambition. Financial stability (which is what I have) is not the same as being wealthy. A person can be financially stable without being wealthy. Financial stability is not a reason I would date someone but a lack of financial stability that is not temporary or because of an emergency or crisis could be a reason I would not date someone or marry someone. I know that doesn't make me shallow. It does however add praticality and reality to the choice of a lifetime mate.

 

So, I think you must have been responding to an opinion that it is important for someone's partner to be wealthy -- although I didn't see an opinion like that on this thread - -- that was not my opinion, in the least.

[TANKGRL]

At this moment I don't remember what post I was referring too...lol

Financial stability is GOOD!!!

I too, don't care how much money we have as long as we are financially stable.

[MissTee]

There was a study in Australia and it indicated the necessary income for a family to be happy was combined income of 90k, i.e 2 parents each on 45k. For example two school teachers would have plenty of money.

 

Don't quote me i just remember hearing about it a while ago.

 

Not in the eastern suburbs of Sydney!!

 

My partner and I have a combined income of about $140k and we manage to live comfortabley but we aren't saving or anything at the moment...

 

Rent alone is $500 a week...

 

The price of houses in our area are in the millions and some of them aren't even that great.

 

Sydney is ridiculous expensive.

[TANKGRL]

50k alot in Australia?? I'm nut sure of the difference in currency from the US. My boyfriend makes about 30,000 a year, our rent is 325 right now. It will be more when we move because we'll have a house instead of a studio apartment.

 

Out of curiosity...(totally random question) Do you go on zgeek?? I LOOOOVE that site lol my bf and I are addicted...

[tmp0620]

Luckily(for some of us) it seems like more and more people are focused on good relationships rather than on children (Look at Europe... the population is shrinking). Living our lives the 'evolutionary' way isn't in our best interest.

[tmp0620]

50k alot in Australia?? I'm nut sure of the difference in currency from the US. My boyfriend makes about 30,000 a year, our rent is 325 right now. It will be more when we move because we'll have a house instead of a studio apartment.

 

Out of curiosity...(totally random question) Do you go on zgeek?? I LOOOOVE that site lol my bf and I are addicted...

 

325!!!! I don't work and I could afford to live there on my own for more than a year!!!

 

Tell me when you move .

[TANKGRL]

lol no prob...the houses we're are looking at are in the Rochester, NY area (the suburbs bout 45 minutes away...the city is crazy and VERY violent) are around 400-600 a month for a 3 bedroom 2 bath with a garage...the garage is the most important for us to store our project cars. We only have one right now.

[poloplayer]

Hi -

 

more and more people are focused on good relationships rather than on children

 

I'm not sure what you mean by focusing on a good relationship and forego children to be safe financially.

 

This is actually a pretty big issue. The population of most developing nations is shrinking, and has been since the 1970's. This will have profound macro and micro impacts on society in the future.

 

Take social security in the U.S. It's estimated to be depleted at 2025-2030. As the boomers retire over the next decade, we do not have the population in the workforce to sustain their social security blanket. S.S. cannot be sustained with so much money being taken out, and so little being contributed. Those who are young now - forget it; there will not be a social security system in place when they retire.

 

So you might say that privitazation is the answer, but as a nation we already have a negative savings rate, and most people are not concerned with retirement - worry about that later. Inflation erodes purchasing power, but inflation has always been a factor, and many generations before us survived. The key is that too many people nowadays do forego children for a better lifestyle, but still live beyond their means.

 

Place holder (Have to run - will finish later)