10M Dollar Marriage

Off Topic
42

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

The thing is, for the most part what we do in life is who we are. There’s more to it than that but in simple terms, how we earn what we have, how we support our loved ones (children and spouse especially), how we provide for ourselves and how we achieve whatever level of independence that we have achieved says a LOT about ourselves and who we are.

edit: What I’m getting at here is that you aren’t defined by what you have nearly as much as you are defined by how you get whatever it is that you have. And to a certain extent, what you do with what you have also says volumes about who you are.[/quote]

I agree with this absolutely. There is nothing sadder than someone whose life has too little challenge and meaning. Vapid is defined as “offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.” If your existence is vapid, so too will you become eventually.

And like IH, I would never knowingly subject myself to a bland, loveless marriage. Sure, many become that over time. But it’s a kind of death. And then combine it with the idea that the most pressing thing I have to think about is whether I should replace the sofa pillows…ugh. NO.

Much happier calculating that when I move next month I’ll be saving probably $80 in gas a month and can start putting $50 of that in long term savings and $30 in my discretionary fund.

Edit: adding to these funds, that is. I already save at a decent rate. My point being that it’s pleasurable to plan, as opposed to having no goals to make.

43

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
I see some people point.
But realisticly how many people are gonaa find “true” love? Most people settle in some way or another, might as well settel with 10M.
I’d take it and just fuck high class hookers on the side to fill that “void”.
Never having to work and living like a Boss is pretty tempting to me.[/quote]

You wouldn’t be living like a “boss” at all. You’d be living like a kept man, which is degrading to say the least. Like I said earlier, there’s more to life than a boatload of money.

The thing is, for the most part what we do in life is who we are. There’s more to it than that but in simple terms, how we earn what we have, how we support our loved ones (children and spouse especially), how we provide for ourselves and how we achieve whatever level of independence that we have achieved says a LOT about ourselves and who we are.

There are those who earn their independence and earn what they have. And then there are those who trade things that can never be gained back (pride, dignity, self-respect) for temporary security (the proverbial $10,000,000). So, which one of those are you?

And keep in mind that you don’t even actually have any money at all. For all intents and purposes, the money you have is still your wife’s since it is entirely in her name and can only be spent by you on terms that she must first pre-approve. So in effect, you are trading your dignity for a chance to live on terms other than your own.

edit: What I’m getting at here is that you aren’t defined by what you have nearly as much as you are defined by how you get whatever it is that you have. And to a certain extent, what you do with what you have also says volumes about who you are.[/quote]

Excellent point, well made.

This is very true. I wouldn’t trade the relationship I have with my wife for anything in the world. We are FAR from rich but are genuinely happy and I am contented with my lot. Had I not found her and known the kind of love i do now then maybe I would have said yes to the question, who knows.

On another note, this is a lot like a game my ex-colleague and I would play. We had a horrible old smelly ogrish boss and would play ‘what would you lick for a £million’. I won’t go into detail bit it involved treadmills and boiler suits and saunas

44

[quote]Cron391 wrote:

[quote]PaddyM wrote:
Nope. I’ve had an opportunity to marry into more wealth than that too.[/quote]

Are you a Man or Women? I assume a man?

Why didn’t you do it? Was the other party really that unaccrative?

[/quote]

I am a man and yes I did not find her attractive enough to spend the next few decades with her. I would rather bang a hot chick I have a connection with than hump my way to the multi-million cape mansion. I am by no means successful for my age (28) but I hope that one day I’ll earn a mansion if I live in one.

45

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

The thing is, for the most part what we do in life is who we are. There’s more to it than that but in simple terms, how we earn what we have, how we support our loved ones (children and spouse especially), how we provide for ourselves and how we achieve whatever level of independence that we have achieved says a LOT about ourselves and who we are.

edit: What I’m getting at here is that you aren’t defined by what you have nearly as much as you are defined by how you get whatever it is that you have. And to a certain extent, what you do with what you have also says volumes about who you are.[/quote]

I agree with this absolutely. There is nothing sadder than someone whose life has too little challenge and meaning. Vapid is defined as “offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.” If your existence is vapid, so too will you become eventually.
[/quote]

There’s no reason to suppose that wealth necessarily alienates one from meaningful challenge. It opens one up to other kinds of challenges that would be considered frivolous in harder times. The bourgeois lifestyle is profligate with talent.

[quote]And like IH, I would never knowingly subject myself to a bland, loveless marriage. Sure, many become that over time. But it’s a kind of death. And then combine it with the idea that the most pressing thing I have to think about is whether I should replace the sofa pillows…ugh. NO.
[/quote]

I understand completely why someone might say his or her life is, as it stands, preferable to the proposed scenario. For the rest, I do not see unions of undying love as the prevailing human condition.

46

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jchenky wrote:

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
I see some people point.
But realisticly how many people are gonaa find “true” love? Most people settle in some way or another, might as well settel with 10M.
I’d take it and just fuck high class hookers on the side to fill that “void”.
Never having to work and living like a Boss is pretty tempting to me.[/quote]

Brutal.

You’ll still be lonely fucking hookers. You have no emotional connection with the hookers either. You still aren’t going to fill that “void”.
[/quote]

Yep.

If anything, fucking hookers would leave a bigger void than ever.[/quote]

Indeed.

All that is happening here is filling a vagina void of a penis and slowly your soul is non existent.

47

The security of money, like that of a marriage, is an illusion. Both can be lost. As other posters pointed out, to depend on a spouse with money is to live on their terms, not your own. And what if they should choose to divorce you 15 years in? Ironically, you’d find yourself in the position of many women in the US, in your 40s with nothing to your name, and no relevant job skills.

In 2009, I made 1.7MM and was in a terribly soul-sucking marriage. Subsequently, I was divorced and in 2011 took home 100K. To say I’m much happier now would be a gross understatement. I wouldn’t trade the fulfillment I experience now for anything.

48

Not in a million years. If you aren’t happy without the 10 million, you won’t be happy with it.

49

I would not marry for money.

I do have a theory that we do not necessarily “fall in love” with the people who are going to make the best long term partners.

I wonder what it would be like to have to develop a relationship with someone who might be intelligent and emotionally mature, but for whom there is no initial chemistry. I expect that for two people who are intellectually and emotionally compatible, that love can develop over time if both are committed to getting along. Arranged marriages are common in India; with the divorce rates in the US, I can’t say that “being in love” with a marriage partner is that important.

Just some thoughts.

50

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jchenky wrote:

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
I see some people point.
But realisticly how many people are gonaa find “true” love? Most people settle in some way or another, might as well settel with 10M.
I’d take it and just fuck high class hookers on the side to fill that “void”.
Never having to work and living like a Boss is pretty tempting to me.[/quote]

Brutal.

You’ll still be lonely fucking hookers. You have no emotional connection with the hookers either. You still aren’t going to fill that “void”.
[/quote]

Yep.

If anything, fucking hookers would leave a bigger void than ever.[/quote]

The void is within you or it is not.

Hookers do not suck the soul out of you.

Your inflated expectations regarding hookers might, but thats on you.

52

[quote]nephorm wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

The thing is, for the most part what we do in life is who we are. There’s more to it than that but in simple terms, how we earn what we have, how we support our loved ones (children and spouse especially), how we provide for ourselves and how we achieve whatever level of independence that we have achieved says a LOT about ourselves and who we are.

edit: What I’m getting at here is that you aren’t defined by what you have nearly as much as you are defined by how you get whatever it is that you have. And to a certain extent, what you do with what you have also says volumes about who you are.[/quote]

I agree with this absolutely. There is nothing sadder than someone whose life has too little challenge and meaning. Vapid is defined as “offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.” If your existence is vapid, so too will you become eventually.
[/quote]

There’s no reason to suppose that wealth necessarily alienates one from meaningful challenge. It opens one up to other kinds of challenges that would be considered frivolous in harder times. The bourgeois lifestyle is profligate with talent.

[quote]And like IH, I would never knowingly subject myself to a bland, loveless marriage. Sure, many become that over time. But it’s a kind of death. And then combine it with the idea that the most pressing thing I have to think about is whether I should replace the sofa pillows…ugh. NO.
[/quote]

I understand completely why someone might say his or her life is, as it stands, preferable to the proposed scenario. For the rest, I do not see unions of undying love as the prevailing human condition. [/quote]

Agree and agree, but the posited scenario suggests that the motivation is money. Could the spouse’s money (patronage) offer the freedom to allow one’s gifts or talents to flourish? Sure, I suppose, and I guess if one’s artistic or intellectual passion were great enough it might not be particularly difficult to forswear romantic or passionate love. That’s not me, though.

I don’t think everyone needs to be out earning money to be challenged or fulfilled, but on the other hand wouldn’t it be awfully stressful to rely on someone else’s largess while pursuing a hobby that offers no financial security? (Not that people don’t do it all the time, but that brings us back to divorce laws, which topic is probably best avoided.)

And as for the prevailing human condition; personally I strive for something greater than “bleak.” That’s not to say that I will succeed, but I find the idea of resigned acceptance soul-crushing. Again, I accept that this may ultimately be my lot. There are many compelling reasons to maintain a loveless or passionless marriage. What I would NOT do is choose to enter it knowingly. Money is not compelling enough, given that I am able to provide well for my basic needs. If I were hungry it would be different.

53

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Agree and agree, but the posited scenario suggests that the motivation is money. Could the spouse’s money (patronage) offer the freedom to allow one’s gifts or talents to flourish? Sure, I suppose, and I guess if one’s artistic or intellectual passion were great enough it might not be particularly difficult to forswear romantic or passionate love. That’s not me, though.

I don’t think everyone needs to be out earning money to be challenged or fulfilled, but on the other hand wouldn’t it be awfully stressful to rely on someone else’s largess while pursuing a hobby that offers no financial security? (Not that people don’t do it all the time, but that brings us back to divorce laws, which topic is probably best avoided.)

And as for the prevailing human condition; personally I strive for something greater than “bleak.” That’s not to say that I will succeed, but I find the idea of resigned acceptance soul-crushing. Again, I accept that this may ultimately be my lot. There are many compelling reasons to maintain a loveless or passionless marriage. What I would NOT do is choose to enter it knowingly. Money is not compelling enough, given that I am able to provide well for my basic needs. If I were hungry it would be different.[/quote]

For most healthy couples, intense passion eventually gives way to comfort, affection, and partnership. There’s no reason for the marriage to be stressful if both parties understand that it is an arrangement entered into to reach shared goals.

I certainly don’t want to dissuade you from seeking happiness. But I don’t know that spending one’s life with a good friend and partner is necessarily “bleak.” It isn’t as flashy as star-crossed lovers, but it can be a happy lot. I’d have to weigh the costs and benefits of the individual situation.

54

You all say this now…but do you have Electricity, food, water, clean water, A bathroom? Live in a house thats more than one singe room?
Poverty is just a word till you see it…

I see it EVERYDAY, all around me in India, I see families of 5 living in a Tent on literally the side of the road, little kids walking around barefoot in shit you would cringe to drive your car over.

There are tons and tons of people that do that here, marry for money and the promise of a better life and “more things”.

They might not be in “true love” but each fulfills their husbandly and wifely duties and live a better life and better life for their kids.

Is that really THAT fucked up?

Money is not everything. But when you don’t have it it’s Definitely something.

55

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
You all say this now…but do you have Electricity, food, water, clean water, A bathroom? Live in a house thats more than one singe room?
Poverty is just a word till you see it…

I see it EVERYDAY, all around me in India, I see families of 5 living in a Tent on literally the side of the road, little kids walking around barefoot in shit you would cringe to drive your car over.

There are tons and tons of people that do that here, marry for money and the promise of a better life and “more things”.

They might not be in “true love” but each fulfills their husbandly and wifely duties and live a better life and better life for their kids.

Is that really THAT fucked up?

Money is not everything. But when you don’t have it it’s Definitely something.[/quote]

Mazlow’s Hierarchy bro.

56

[quote]nephorm wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Agree and agree, but the posited scenario suggests that the motivation is money. Could the spouse’s money (patronage) offer the freedom to allow one’s gifts or talents to flourish? Sure, I suppose, and I guess if one’s artistic or intellectual passion were great enough it might not be particularly difficult to forswear romantic or passionate love. That’s not me, though.

I don’t think everyone needs to be out earning money to be challenged or fulfilled, but on the other hand wouldn’t it be awfully stressful to rely on someone else’s largess while pursuing a hobby that offers no financial security? (Not that people don’t do it all the time, but that brings us back to divorce laws, which topic is probably best avoided.)

And as for the prevailing human condition; personally I strive for something greater than “bleak.” That’s not to say that I will succeed, but I find the idea of resigned acceptance soul-crushing. Again, I accept that this may ultimately be my lot. There are many compelling reasons to maintain a loveless or passionless marriage. What I would NOT do is choose to enter it knowingly. Money is not compelling enough, given that I am able to provide well for my basic needs. If I were hungry it would be different.[/quote]

For most healthy couples, intense passion eventually gives way to comfort, affection, and partnership. There’s no reason for the marriage to be stressful if both parties understand that it is an arrangement entered into to reach shared goals.

I certainly don’t want to dissuade you from seeking happiness. But I don’t know that spending one’s life with a good friend and partner is necessarily “bleak.” It isn’t as flashy as star-crossed lovers, but it can be a happy lot. I’d have to weigh the costs and benefits of the individual situation. [/quote]

I think there’s a difference between a romance that has mellowed into complacency and one that starts with a strong element of disinterest and then mellows from there. The OP:

I’m not reading good friend or partner into that. I read “moderate emotional, mental chemistry” to indicate the level of liking I’d feel for a coworker I don’t mind talking to for a few minutes in passing, but would never bother to seek out socially. “In no way attractive” would, I fear, become repugnance over time.

I’m not looking for flashy in any aspect of my life, whether relationships or work. I’m looking for warm and rewarding, with frequent opportunities for laughter. Perhaps those things could be achieved through the pursuit of a hobby or career within the proposed marriage, but I don’t see them coming from the marriage itself.

57

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
You all say this now…but do you have Electricity, food, water, clean water, A bathroom? Live in a house thats more than one singe room?
Poverty is just a word till you see it…

I see it EVERYDAY, all around me in India, I see families of 5 living in a Tent on literally the side of the road, little kids walking around barefoot in shit you would cringe to drive your car over.

There are tons and tons of people that do that here, marry for money and the promise of a better life and “more things”.

They might not be in “true love” but each fulfills their husbandly and wifely duties and live a better life and better life for their kids.

Is that really THAT fucked up?

Money is not everything. But when you don’t have it it’s Definitely something.[/quote]

I certainly acknowledge that I am able to turn my nose up at this sort of relationship because my standard of living is adequate. I have some experience of poverty and know that a quest for romantic love is the least of its priorities. If I were impoverished I would accept the offer. But I’m not.

58

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
You all say this now…but do you have Electricity, food, water, clean water, A bathroom? Live in a house thats more than one singe room?
Poverty is just a word till you see it…

I see it EVERYDAY, all around me in India, I see families of 5 living in a Tent on literally the side of the road, little kids walking around barefoot in shit you would cringe to drive your car over.

There are tons and tons of people that do that here, marry for money and the promise of a better life and “more things”.

They might not be in “true love” but each fulfills their husbandly and wifely duties and live a better life and better life for their kids.

Is that really THAT fucked up?

Money is not everything. But when you don’t have it it’s Definitely something.[/quote]

Outstanding post!

I would like to think I wouldn’t marry for the money, but then again I never had to. If I lived in that type of grinding poverty I’m sure I would think differently. Shit, just going to a relatively rich country like Costa Rico can show you how much better the poor here have it.

59

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]Cron391 wrote:
You all say this now…but do you have Electricity, food, water, clean water, A bathroom? Live in a house thats more than one singe room?
Poverty is just a word till you see it…

I see it EVERYDAY, all around me in India, I see families of 5 living in a Tent on literally the side of the road, little kids walking around barefoot in shit you would cringe to drive your car over.

There are tons and tons of people that do that here, marry for money and the promise of a better life and “more things”.

They might not be in “true love” but each fulfills their husbandly and wifely duties and live a better life and better life for their kids.

Is that really THAT fucked up?

Money is not everything. But when you don’t have it it’s Definitely something.[/quote]

I certainly acknowledge that I am able to turn my nose up at this sort of relationship because my standard of living is adequate. I have some experience of poverty and know that a quest for romantic love is the least of its priorities. If I were impoverished I would accept the offer. But I’m not.[/quote]

Impoverished And Poverty
Just words I used to hear and see on “feed the children” commercials.
I’ve seen the meaning of those words with my own two eye…and lemme tell ya it takes a part of ya, when you realize how much some people truly suffer in this world.

And on the marriage for love thing, Most people in the Western world marry out of love right?
Yet look at the divorce rate…

A lot of people have arranged marriages here, where both parties bring certain things to the table and promise to behave accordingly and stay faithful to one another and raise a family together. Granted this is seen as “selling out” and a “business like mentality” when it comes to love.

Granted a lot of Indians treat marriage like a corporate business deal (literally the families of the boy will negotiate a dowary from the girls parents, its literally like a boardroom back and forth).

Which is more realtistic? Being totally honest with your partner on what they can expect from you and what you can expect from them?

Or just jump if cause “I love em”.

Having said this, I’d never have an arrange marriage. I’d only marry for love, but If I was in poverty I would jump at the chance to move up in society.

60

I know the saying “Money can’t buy happiness” is cliche, but it’s very true.

Money only ever buys comfort. True happiness comes from inner strength. Even if you inherited 10M by yourself with no strings attached to a marraige, it wouldn’t make you any happier. It will only give you comfort. The irnoic part is that sometimes it can even make you LESS happy. If you live your whole life in the ocmfort of a fat bank account without having to work for anything or go out of your “comfort zone” it can impair your emotional and psychological development.

…but I suppose this is all coming from a guy who has struggled with depression for a long long time.