Love or Money?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Beloved said:
I`m glad it didn`t have to come to that, ChemGal.
Click to expand...
So I am! I had other things to worry about, so it wasn't really a serious thing going through my mind at the time, but it was for Chemguy! The costs of meds can be scary! There's a new one out, no fed or provincial funding yet. It's about $2000/dose! At this point, I don't think I really need it, but I do wonder if it's worthwhile getting trained and keeping one dose on hand - depends on how long until it expires. Hopefully hospitals will have it soon, right now it isn't stocked by the sounds of it. I'm thinking it could be useful to me in 2 ways: 1. My typical med fails to work, having it on hand, or getting it from the ER would work. Only 1 hospital in the city carries my current med though, so I expect the same will be true for this. If I spend a fair amount of time in a different area with a hospital, I can put in a request they carry it. I hope eventually the same will be true for this new one. 2. I have a bad attack that gets bad fast. Doing a pre-loaded syringe into my stomach would be much faster than mixing my stuff up and starting an IV. It takes minutes just to get it loaded into the syringe.

Back on topic, I would choose love. I think money helps a bit with that though. Just with my personality, I would have a tough time being with someone who was irresponsible with money, which seems to be the biggest factor that makes people 'poor' with the people I know fairly well. Right now, if I had the choice of being with Chemguy vs. a billionaire, I would stay with Chemguy. If I had to pay for my med, I would be willing to work something out though where I lived with a billionaire and only dated Chemguy. :) What's the male term for mistress?
 
Don't forget that with affection, shared interests, commitment - love can grow and last a lifetime. And the fire and passion of romantic love can quickly peter out with dirty diapers, EI running out, empty shelves, worry about eviction, and harassing phone calls from collection agencies.
 
Love or money? I think some of you on this thread have been defining "money" as "financial stability," while others are defining "money" as "luxuries and status."

While a young couple may think it's romantic to be in love and barely making ends meet, most of us who are are older than teens know that it's awfully hard to to be romantic when you're worried about paying the bills. Financial stability brings less stress and more freedom.

Couples who divorce (something like 50% of all marriages?) cite arguments about money as the number one reason they grew apart.

So we know that financial stability is definitely an important part of a successful relationship.

So there are people who marry solely for financial advantages. (Or at least, we assume that's the case.)
I'm thinking of Hugh Hefner. He regularly marries a gorgeous young woman many times younger than himself, and I assume that has nothing to
do with love and everything to do with maintaining his status as the original Playboy, and having a living advertisement for his product always by his side. And I assume that a woman who marries Hugh Hefner is doing it for his money. But we tend to assume that these kinds of celebrity marriages have very little to do with love, and everything to do with money.
 
I feel for women of previous generations who really had to make this choice.

In past ages, women couldn't pursue careers or have jobs. Their only choice for financial stability was to marry well.

And I don't blame women at all for choosing with their heads, not their hearts.

Most women would probably choose to marry a man with a fortune, and hope they would learn to love him.
(Or at least, hope they would learn to get along well as a couple.)
These women probably felt that it was safer to marry for money than to risk being homeless and starving with the man they loved.

If I were a heroine in a Jane Austen novel, I would have no qualms about marrying the undesirable-but-wealthy guy.
I wouldn't give the poor-but-desirable-guy a second glance.
Because the fear of being an old woman living in destitution and poverty would be a very real fear for me.
 
Some of what you posted, GO, made me think of arranged marriages, where it is the parents/family who sometimes receive financial security or benefits of a marriage contract. In some of these cases love is not the end goal - at least not the passionate, romantic type.
 
Beloved, I was thinking of arranged marriages as well. They work well.

I think it is about attitude. If you both desire for it to work, if you focus on relationship, and don't live with your head in the clouds, then the reason you married won't impact it.
 
I think they can work well too, Pinga - if passion and romance isn't the goal. I don't mean to suggest that in some arranged marriages that there isn't passion and romance, but I don't think there is in all arranged marriages.
 
Bite my tongue, but I think most of the arranged marriages, I see,
the men are HEAD of household.
 
hmm, crazyheart. I think that there are often roles, with each having their area of responsiblity. Those tend to be clearer defined, but, not always. I have seen great arranged marriages with professionals that I work with.
 
I do think that love can be nurtured and grown.

I know two couples with arranged marriages who are very much in love and happy.

So if total strangers can fall in love over time then I suspect anyone can who is committed to making a marriage work and committed to falling in love.

Money sure makes life easier
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top