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.
Would argue driving new performance cars during wkend AMs and dating talented young women on some evenings are far cheaper, more time-efficient hobbies/sources of entertainment for many workaholics than attempts at anachronistic, legalized relationships that place one's financial health in jeopardy...
If you are an affluent male, there are many more desirable alternatives to entering a GOVERNMENT CONTRACT that requires you to fork over 60+% of your money to a woman you used to have a relationship with (i.e., an ex-wife).
Look at the options you have:
1. domestic partner with kids (an alternative to marriage with kids)
2. live-in-girlfriend (an alternative to childless marriage)
3. long term girlfriend
4. short term girlfriends
5. multiple short term girlfriends
6. ex-girlfriend with kids (child support without the added burden of alimony)
Very good point, Miles. And, let's not forget that the courtesan is not going to be there in an hour of need, since their contractual duties are for companionship, and should one face a severe illness or other emergency, there's no emotional attachment and incentive for said "employee" to lend support, but the role of the love which might have seemed risky at the start pays off in the end, filling the chasm of emptiness that can sometimes disrupt an otherwise charmed life.
Oh please!
What world are you living in? Plenty of women, who were in love, leave their men in times of illness or emergency.
The difference is that:
A girlfriend who loves you is a pure asset with NO liabilities. A wife who loves you is an asset with potential, unknown liabilities exceeding her worth.
What world are you living in? Plenty of women, who were in love, leave their men in times of illness or emergency.
The difference is that:
A girlfriend who loves you is a pure asset with NO liabilities. A wife who loves you is an asset with potential, unknown liabilities exceeding her worth.
i have this vague notion that most people do not evaluate love and sharing life with a spouse as accountants dissecting a balance sheet.
also re: girfriends being pure assets with no liabilities, i think the late actor lee marvin might have disagreed with you. perhaps you can do some research on how his girfriend took him to the cleaners. when she was done, he was left with pretty much just a pair of polka dot boxers.
What world are you living in? Plenty of women, who were in love, leave their men in times of illness or emergency.
The difference is that:
A girlfriend who loves you is a pure asset with NO liabilities. A wife who loves you is an asset with potential, unknown liabilities exceeding her worth.
Wrong. They can and do get palimony in many cases if the relationship ends. And, thinking of a spouse in terms of money indicates that the relationship has a flaw, and that should not be undertaken as a serious relationship in the first place.
[quote=Miles;5373067]i have this vague notion that most people do not evaluate love and sharing life with a spouse as accountants dissecting a balance sheet.
I have this vague notion that 50% of married guys end up getting financially dissected by their ex-wives.
also re: girfriends being pure assets with no liabilities, i think the late actor lee marvin might have disagreed with you. perhaps you can do some research on how his girfriend took him to the cleaners. when she was done, he was left with pretty much just a pair of polka dot boxers.
YOU need to do your research.
She asked for HALF his earnings ($1.8 million) for the 6 years she spent with him. She got... $106,000.
The average Joe loses way more than that in a divorce.
[quote=bmwguydc;5374660]Wrong. They can and do get palimony in many cases if the relationship ends.
For every woman that gets a dime from some high profile ex-boyfriend, there are a few million women who get bank off the average joe ex-husbands.
And, thinking of a spouse in terms of money indicates that the relationship has a flaw, and that should not be undertaken as a serious relationship in the first place.
You sound like a guy who hasn't had a whole lot of experience with women.
i have this vague notion that most people do not evaluate love and sharing life with a spouse as accountants dissecting a balance sheet.
I have this vague notion that 50% of married guys end up getting financially dissected by their ex-wives.
also re: girfriends being pure assets with no liabilities, i think the late actor lee marvin might have disagreed with you. perhaps you can do some research on how his girfriend took him to the cleaners. when she was done, he was left with pretty much just a pair of polka dot boxers.
YOU need to do your research.
She asked for HALF his earnings ($1.8 million) for the 6 years she spent with him. She got... $106,000.
The average Joe loses way more than that in a divorce.
Ahh, so you did some reserch the past few days and came back. Be careful of the sources you use. I won't argue about numbers but I do know that Marvin, Eastwood, and many others rue the day they entered those so-called safe, unmarried relationships. Many an actor and celebrity lost both in their wallets and in their self-respect pursuing relationships predicated falsely on safeguarding assets.
Perhaps marriage with a pre-nup for the skeptical like yourself might do the trick? Somehow, I don't think so for you. Having read your posts you obviously have decided that relationships are all about sex, money, and "me, me, me all the way." You will serve yourself better indeed to refrain from marriage as it would not be a good match for you.
dreaded question-- if one is 46, never married, very committed to the job (been there since i was 28), hetero, has some difficulties with anxiety (not depression though), socialization issues, money issues and ambivalence, do people look down on this? I have once heard a woman say if a man isn't hitched in his 40's he's got too many problems which hurts but I know there a re some guys my age who aren't married but just in a relationship. i would like some ideas on this since this is a never talked about issue
I won't argue about numbers but I do know that Marvin, Eastwood, and many others rue the day they entered those so-called safe, unmarried relationships. Many an actor and celebrity lost both in their wallets and in their self-respect pursuing relationships predicated falsely on safeguarding assets.
Please name one rich celeb who has lost HALF his earnings to an ex-girlfriend.
Please explain why a guy like Hugh Hefner who has had plenty of ex-girlfriends still has his mansion while most ex-husbands get their houses taken away.
dreaded question-- if one is 46, never married, very committed to the job (been there since i was 28), hetero, has some difficulties with anxiety (not depression though), socialization issues, money issues and ambivalence, do people look down on this? I have once heard a woman say if a man isn't hitched in his 40's he's got too many problems which hurts but I know there a re some guys my age who aren't married but just in a relationship. i would like some ideas on this since this is a never talked about issue
Women don't look down on middle-aged men who aren't married. They look down on middle-aged men who CAN'T get married.
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.
