3 ms·
You say that like spending money on marriage is a bad thing. But effectively, if you marry someone who earns less than you, you're paying money to maintain that
by klipt 5y ago
You say that like spending money on marriage is a bad thing. But effectively, if you marry someone who earns less than you, you're paying money to maintain that marriage for the rest of your life anyway.
- OJFord 5y agoNot in any obvious definite way if you're both above sustaining yourselves. I.e. if there is discretionary money (sourced from both parties) then what you say is only true if the decisions/compromises not in your favour outweigh your portion of the discretionary funds. (...I don't want to spend my life thinking like this.)
- klipt 5y agoWell you can ignore it as long as the marriage goes well :-) but in a divorce the court will make it very clear just how much money the marriage cost the higher earner, both in terms of dividing up past earnings, and in terms of dividing up future earnings via alimony and child support.
- quantumBerry 5y agoWhat the court imposes is more of a penalty on divorce, than a representation on what a wife costs. For instance, we used to make a little money when I married my wife, now we make a lot more. We didn't change our lifestyle or spending, nor what we spent on the child. Just savings increased, none of which we planned to give to the child. But now the child support calculator says I owe a lot more after a divorce, which is supposed to be money for the child. If the cost of the child didn't go up, it makes no sense the child support would go up when you earn more money, but it does. It's just a penalty on whoever earns more or doesn't take the child, as societies way of getting even for violating Christian norms.
- klipt 5y agoBut a penalty for one side can be viewed as an incentive for the other side. Which given either side can initiate divorce, could increase the divorce rate.
- quantumBerry 5y agoAgreed. I revise my statement: What the court imposes is more of a penalty and incentive for divorce, than a representation on what a wife costs.
- MiddleEndian 5y agoThis is not necessarily true, beyond the fact that you must pay to live no matter what. If you have one person making, say, $300k/year and another making $60k/year, together you share a bedroom, share a fridge, share a stove, share a living room, etc. Your total costs could lower than they would be otherwise.
- akomtu 5y agoEven if you're sharing the fridge, you still owe 120k/year. This amount is just due at divorce, which creates an illusion of saving money.