Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,948,491 times
Reputation: 40635
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofur
That still sucks though, if you are married to someone for lets say 10 years, and then they decide to break it off. Half of all the profits you made on investments for a decade is a lot of dough.
Because guys think of the big picture... if they have built up a substantial portfolio and assets, they dont want to take a chance of losing half of it, plus maybe an 18 year financial commitment or two on a hunch...
Not saying I am one of those guys, but I understand the argument. Most women do not have these sorts of things to think about, have the legal system and courts in their favor unless they are a habitual felon, sexual predator or repeat offender junkie drug abuser
If the percentage truly was as high as 90%, only a fool would try
Anyone who views a child as an 18 year financial commitment should never have children.
Marriage isn't something that just happens to you. Neither are children. You don't just walk down the street and step in "marriage" or "children." They are choices. You have a say in the matter. If you never meet someone that is worth getting married to - then by all means, you should never ever marry. If, however, you meet someone that you truly want to marry, that you can't imagine spending the rest of your life with out, that you think is worth anything and everything - then maybe marriage is for you. And if you want to bring a life into this world that you will love and cherish forever - then maybe children are for you. If you see them as just a drain on your money - you shouldn't have children.
If I'd have 250k saved while single, there would be 500k (more or less) if married. The interest/growth on those would be proportional.
If it split when the marriage ended I'd have the 250k plus whatever the proportional return.
No difference, unless you had a bad divorce (which is uncommon) and the lawyers ate up a chunk.
I'm assuming you meant that if you had 250k invested when you first got married, 10 years later you'd have 500k if you invested it properly.
If the 250k of income you picked up during the marriage is split, that's 125k that goes away. So you end up with 375k in the bank all said and done instead of the 500k you would've had if you were single (or stayed married). That hurts. 10% of 500k is 50k, 10% of 375k is 37,500. Compound interest works it's magic when you keep increasing your principle every year. The last thing you want is to throw away a big chunk of your principle.
I'm assuming you meant that if you had 250k invested when you first got married, 10 years later you'd have 500k if you invested it properly.
If the 250k of income you picked up during the marriage is split, that's 125k that goes away. So you end up with 375k in the bank all said and done instead of the 500k you would've had if you were single (or stayed married). That hurts. 10% of 500k is 50k, 10% of 375k is 37,500. Compound interest works it's magic when you keep increasing your principle every year. The last thing you want is to throw away a big chunk of your principle.
Your ignoring what your spouse contributed.
Since you can control who you marry, and can agree to a financial strategy with that person before you get married. So, with a high amount of personal value placed on growth of wealth, you would likely be marrying someone with similar outlook and desire to contribute to portfolios and grow wealth. The 50/50 split would then work both ways, and you would not have much financial risk because your spouse would have similar portfolios, be contributing equally to them, and having her earnings subject to the split as well.
I'm assuming you meant that if you had 250k invested when you first got married, 10 years later you'd have 500k if you invested it properly.
If the 250k of income you picked up during the marriage is split, that's 125k that goes away. So you end up with 375k in the bank all said and done instead of the 500k you would've had if you were single (or stayed married). That hurts. 10% of 500k is 50k, 10% of 375k is 37,500. Compound interest works it's magic when you keep increasing your principle every year. The last thing you want is to throw away a big chunk of your principle.
And what if you actually fall in love with someone - and you *gasp* don't actually get divorced! What then?!?!?! What if you are actually happily married???
Why does that never seem to come up as a possibility when people are talking about marriage?
Money is money. Money is not love. I would risk money for love but I wouldn't sacrifice a chance at love for holding onto my money. My money doesn't make me laugh. My money doesn't hold me when I cry. My money doesn't fall asleep in bed next to me at night. My money didn't give me 2 amazing children. My money doesn't make me feel special.
I honestly can't imagine anyone deciding that money is more important if they knew what it was like to be completely and utterly in love with someone- but then again, everyone is different.
And what if you actually fall in love with someone - and you *gasp* don't actually get divorced! What then?!?!?! What if you are actually happily married???
Why does that never seem to come up as a possibility when people are talking about marriage?
Money is money. Money is not love. I would risk money for love but I wouldn't sacrifice a chance at love for holding onto my money. My money doesn't make me laugh. My money doesn't hold me when I cry. My money doesn't fall asleep in bed next to me at night. My money didn't give me 2 amazing children. My money doesn't make me feel special.
I honestly can't imagine anyone deciding that money is more important if they knew what it was like to be completely and utterly in love with someone- but then again, everyone is different.
Because it's basically a coin flip, and women initiate approximately 75% of all divorces.
Because it's basically a coin flip, and women initiate approximately 75% of all divorces.
Most common reason is she's "unhappy."
Sorry, I'm not getting Eat, Pray, Loved.
Well, it really isn't for a variety of reasons... but the anti-marriage people love to keep propping this up as sound reasoning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
