Fatwallet Consensus: Why not to marry (alternatively titled...how to implode a thread in one bagel or less)

beanie4me said:   soundtechie said:   It's impossible to discuss the benefits of marriage without starting with the concept that sex outside of marriage is wrong. Absent this concept, I agree that only a fool would ever marry.

I know this got red, but I think it is a good point. I think a lot of people are led to marry because they want sex and believe that sex outside of marriage is a sin. It's certainly not the only reason to get married, but I've seen a few couples divorce because this was essentially their only reason for being married.

Right, this was my point - not to preach about morality, but rather my point was that if sex outside of marriage was moral, no man would ever get married. *I* wouldn't get married. The world is full of women who will have sex with you. For companionship and unconditional love, get a dog.

By the way, the 50% divorce rate statistic is overstated. If you and your spouse are college graduates--and I think that applies to a lot of folks here, though not everybody--you're a lot less likely to divorce.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1989124,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-2789615.html

BarryAndLevon said:   whodini said:   College enrollment of women is 55% and growing, to men's 45%. The future is clear -- women will on average earn more than men. From an economic standpoint, you're likely to benefit if you marry a wife. I have known personally 4 women who are supporting their husbands. This trend will grow.


The trend won't grow forever. Better-educated, higher-earning women tend to have fewer-children, which is another way of saying that in the modern world, such women have low reproductive fitness. Their genes will be selected out of the population and the women of the future will be dumber and/or less career-oriented.

I'd like to see what guys on FWF will be complaining about in a few thousand years.

This is exactly why the movie Idiocracy should be considered a preview of our future. The more kids the poor and stupid have the more taxes we will pay to support them... until the a new president realizes we can't support an entire welfare generation and cuts them off.

mainomega said:   BarryAndLevon said:   whodini said:   College enrollment of women is 55% and growing, to men's 45%. The future is clear -- women will on average earn more than men. From an economic standpoint, you're likely to benefit if you marry a wife. I have known personally 4 women who are supporting their husbands. This trend will grow.


The trend won't grow forever. Better-educated, higher-earning women tend to have fewer-children, which is another way of saying that in the modern world, such women have low reproductive fitness. Their genes will be selected out of the population and the women of the future will be dumber and/or less career-oriented.

I'd like to see what guys on FWF will be complaining about in a few thousand years.

This is exactly why the movie Idiocracy should be considered a preview of our future. The more kids the poor and stupid have the more taxes we will pay to support them... until the a new president realizes we can't support an entire welfare generation and cuts them off.

Idiocracy is a GREAT movie to watch (well the opening sequences showing what happens to mankind)- turn the movie off after that. The highly educated professional couples I know have no or 1 kid. Very very few have 2+ (I have 3). Educated rich people put off having kids until it is the 'right time'- then they are 35 and surprise surprise can't have kids, or have 1 if they are lucky. Also many of my friends are think kids are icky and just don't want them. Poor uneducated people start banging kids out when they are 15. Evolution at work.

saladdin said:   It goes against men's nature. Even when we are 40 and happily in a relationship when that 18 year old hottie walks by our instinct kicks in.

Marriage is a creation that is going against nature.

Humans are selfish by DNA. Putting 2 people whos first thought is always "Me" is just asking for trouble.

If you are wise man then you see below the surface. Hotness don't last forever. You got a choice to make.

If you build a family and life that has meaning, you aren't going to toss it away to relive your youth.

Some humans are intelligent by DNA. Actually, there are a fair amount of people that live functional lives and don't screw up their kids with multiple marriages and partners.

wp746911 said:   mainomega said:   BarryAndLevon said:   whodini said:   College enrollment of women is 55% and growing, to men's 45%. The future is clear -- women will on average earn more than men. From an economic standpoint, you're likely to benefit if you marry a wife. I have known personally 4 women who are supporting their husbands. This trend will grow.


The trend won't grow forever. Better-educated, higher-earning women tend to have fewer-children, which is another way of saying that in the modern world, such women have low reproductive fitness. Their genes will be selected out of the population and the women of the future will be dumber and/or less career-oriented.

I'd like to see what guys on FWF will be complaining about in a few thousand years.

This is exactly why the movie Idiocracy should be considered a preview of our future. The more kids the poor and stupid have the more taxes we will pay to support them... until the a new president realizes we can't support an entire welfare generation and cuts them off.

Idiocracy is a GREAT movie to watch (well the opening sequences showing what happens to mankind)- turn the movie off after that. The highly educated professional couples I know have no or 1 kid. Very very few have 2+ (I have 3). Educated rich people put off having kids until it is the 'right time'- then they are 35 and surprise surprise can't have kids, or have 1 if they are lucky. Also many of my friends are think kids are icky and just don't want them. Poor uneducated people start banging kids out when they are 15. Evolution at work.

And unfortunately I think we are about 35% to 40% into the Idiocracy Concept, and within the next 2 generations, the country will be on the other side of the curve, sliding rapidly into it. Coming from a country where it already hashappened, the only way to control it is with a ruling Corporate Oligarchy, which is what is emerging here. With a true democracy, Idiocracy is the only possible outcome the way the birthrates are going.

Camacho 2080!

soundtechie said:   beanie4me said:   soundtechie said:   It's impossible to discuss the benefits of marriage without starting with the concept that sex outside of marriage is wrong. Absent this concept, I agree that only a fool would ever marry.

I know this got red, but I think it is a good point. I think a lot of people are led to marry because they want sex and believe that sex outside of marriage is a sin. It's certainly not the only reason to get married, but I've seen a few couples divorce because this was essentially their only reason for being married.

Right, this was my point - not to preach about morality, but rather my point was that if sex outside of marriage was moral, no man would ever get married. *I* wouldn't get married. The world is full of women who will have sex with you. For companionship and unconditional love, get a dog.

It is not a sin just because. It is a sin because of some wise men thousands of years ago figuring out that for a society to survive and be healthy there needs to be family units. Whether that was figured out by divine intervention or not is where religion comes in. But you can be completely non-religious or an atheist and still see the wisdom of the Ten Commandments. It was quite a movie by the way.

I'd be interested to see a side-thread of discussion in here - if one does choose to marry, when is the best point in one's life to do so? The lesson hubby and I learned was definitely NOT to get married while in college, particularly if one partner earns significantly more than the other. He and I got married while both still in school (I think I had two semesters of undergrad to go, he had three AND grad school). I hadn't been able to get free money for school for years due to my income - but after we got married, he lost his ability to get grants, too. Retrospectively, we should have waited until next summer to get married (amounting to a four year delay in matrimony) so as to best benefit from financial aid opportunities (at least for him, since I got nothing either way).

I love my husband and children. I bust my butt to earn as much as I can, and it is all for them.

Public forums are typically led around by the vocal few and Fatwallet is without exception. The vocal few that harp on the benefits of avoiding marriage believes in this cause with a passion and will discuss it at length with anyone, anywhere, and any chance they get. The majority that are happily married and financially successful have a silent understanding that marriage is largely a personal decision with some financial implications. It goes without saying that every one should be careful about entering into marriage, and there are indeed important financial considerations.

My gut feeling is that some people are just not good at relationships. By that I don't mean that someone is socially awkward or shy/introverted. What I mean is some people just don't know what's important to them and what they should be looking for in friends, family, and life-partner. If they view a relationship only in terms of companionship, sexual gratification, offspring, expenses and liabilities, then that proves my point. How two people come together in a marriage is far more involved and complex than these chunks of compartmentalized factors. Finding someone to marry isn't like re-balancing your portfolio, where the whole is simply the sum of the parts. You are supposed to find someone who bring you above and beyond where you would have been without, and vice-verse, in every aspect of life.

First of all, the % of marriage that end in divorce includes all sorts of things, like people on their third or fourth spouses, people married at 18, etc. The truth is that if you get married at least a few years after college, and it's your first marriage, and you know the person for at least a year before marrying, and add in another few reasonable factors (by which I mean that you're a reasonable person, and not getting married on a whim, and entering into it with your eyes open), then the rate is way below 50%. In fact, the 50% statistic is flawed anyway:

http://msgboard.snopes.com/message/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/19divo.html

So it's fine, if you think marriage is bad don't get married, but nobody should propagate the myth that half of all marriages fail as if that is a real statistic and it should apply to everyone getting married.

schop said:   Summation of those articles: Hardly any men are getting married, but the few masochists who marry over-the-hill women close to 30 are more likely to stay married since those women are too broken-down to find a man to run off with...though only 10 years is guaranteed, since once the kids are more independent and the husband has built up some assets it's anyone's guess how long the hags will refrain from divorcing for fun and profit.

The only percentage that matters is the percent of men hammered by discriminatory family laws.

Jesus dude, undoubtedly you will lead a life filled with love & happiness.

couponhed said:   Now, lets move away from relationship issues and look at marriage in terms relevant to a financial forum.

In purely practical terms, there is one advantage to marriage - access to a partner's group health insurance.
I've posted this before in older threads, but there are some more advantages to being legally married.
1) In the absence of a will, being married provides a clear path on how assets are to be transferred when you die. Since a will/trust takes time and money, for those who have limited assets it may be a cheaper option to get married and then know that the assets will transfer to the spouse according to the provisions of your state laws. If you were not married, then you likely need to spend the money to get a good will/trust in place if you want your money to go to your significant other vs going to your closest living relative. There are also estate taxes that are waived when assets go to the spouse.
2) Being married basically gives your spouse the ability to make health care decisions on your behalf if you are incapacitated. Without a marriage or living will this could default to your closest living relative. This is only a minor point as setting up a living will/power of attorney is cheap and straightforward.
3) Custody of children--maybe this is highly state dependent, but if you are not married when you have kids then the custody of the child generally belongs to the mother. Should you go your separate ways, as the father you will still likely be required to pay child support, be entitled to visitation, but you will likely have a difficult time to get full or joint custody. As a man, I would never willingly have a child with someone without retaining my legal rights to be involved in decision making for the child. Being married helps to secure my involvement, as if I ever get divorced, there is a clear legal mechanism that will allow me to try to best preserve custody of my child. My cousin willingly had 2 kids with a long term girlfriend, they split up, and now the mom is basically in charge of the kids and the dad has no more input. Maybe that is okay with some men, but not for me. Also if you don't get married and have kids you need to get some legal documents specifying who the child goes to if you die. If you as a man weren't married and don't have some kind of legal custody of your child when the mother dies you could have to deal in a legal battle with her relatives who might try to get the kids. But if you are married the kids will go to you unless someone can prove you are unfit.
4) Marriage gives you benefits with social security in terms of claiming on a spouse's record, and possibly getting some benefits if your spouse dies and you have kids. The benefits are simply not available if you are not married.

BTW, I think access to group health insurance is huge (but if this is the only benefit you see just wait until you need access to health insurance and then get married).

FSBox said:   Public forums are typically led around by the vocal few and Fatwallet is without exception. The vocal few that harp on the benefits of avoiding marriage believes in this cause with a passion and will discuss it at length with anyone, anywhere, and any chance they get. The majority that are happily married and financially successful have a silent understanding that marriage is largely a personal decision with some financial implications. It goes without saying that every one should be careful about entering into marriage, and there are indeed important financial considerations.

My gut feeling is that some people are just not good at relationships. By that I don't mean that someone is socially awkward or shy/introverted. What I mean is some people just don't know what's important to them and what they should be looking for in friends, family, and life-partner. If they view a relationship only in terms of companionship, sexual gratification, offspring, expenses and liabilities, then that proves my point. How two people come together in a marriage is far more involved and complex than these chunks of compartmentalized factors. Finding someone to marry isn't like re-balancing your portfolio, where the whole is simply the sum of the parts. You are supposed to find someone who bring you above and beyond where you would have been without, and vice-verse, in every aspect of life.

Those same vocal few probably look like These guys

runaway76 said:   
18year old making $70k pays $11,250 in taxes.

Bull. There is no way any single male in the military at 18 makes 70k in income without some insane scam on the side.

runaway76 said:   GREEN since I really took some time to write this well thought out piece.

Ok, MY **FINANCIAL** decisions why I got married:

1) Under 25 years old = HUGE discount on my/her car insurance. Financial savings approximately $1000/year. I did not drive better or worse - in fact I really drove the same, but the bill was significantly less. Just check the prices an 18 year old car insurance married vs unmarried the same car. If you got married at 18-25 = 7 years; that is ~$7k savings for being the same driver over 7 years.

2) Tax advantages - I made much more money at the time - the wife's lower income put my money in a lower tax bracket. A standard deduction on a person who made $0 does not really help her, but helped US by filing jointly. Maybe now I am more fatwalletized, I guess I could file jointly and not be married under same household? Quick number using 2011 tax code: 18year old making $70k pays $11,250 in taxes. GF making $0k pays $0 in taxes. Which is a total of $11,250 to uncle sam. Now, if I got married filing jointly, with in put of $70k of mine, and $0 of hers, I pay a total of $6800 to uncle sam. That is a savings of $4450/year. If you got married at 18-25 = 7 years and assume tax code and income remains the same that is $4450*7 = $31,150 over 7 years.

3) Military benefits - since I was in the military, I got a RAISE to have a wife (dependent). They call it "BAH with dependents", so living in the same house and getting married gave me a little more income. So getting married was a no brainier. She gets the military benefits as a dependent to include health benefits --I would pay co-pays before, and she would buy her own health insurance before, but now she was covered. This also includes having kids, etc. She could also get military benefits as a wife, such as banks for USAA, using military commissaries, travel, etc. When you are deployed you get "family separation allowance" is an additional benefit that a single guy does not get. If you are low in rank and you get married, you get a raise, and not forced to live on the base. Now if you are E4 and below you are forced to live in government quarters if it is available vice getting commercial difference to live in the city. So, if you don't want to live with other military as an E4 or below, you better get married. Real no brainier because government quarters (i.e. living on a navy ship) are not usually the place you would want to live. Not to forget, when I was single we had to pay to move the girlfriend's stuff/car/etc to the new workplace, but once we were married, we got the benefit to move both of us (family).
rough numbers: You get married as E1 in San Diego. BAH with dependents is $1959, BAH without dependents is $0 and the govt pays a single E1 to live in govt quarters. $1959*12 = $23,508 / year. Don't forget the health benefits and other things. Unfortunately the math gets a little complicated, but you can see the benefits are easily $25k/year over 7 years.

So, I got married! --Too bad I did not get married earlier because I could have saved more money. My relationship was same before the marriage and after the marriage. I was the happiest guy in the world to take advantage of the financial benefits AND have the "bestest"/prettiest/"super-sexiest"/smartest/loveliest/wonderfuliest wife on the planet. (sorry, no pics for you). SHE was the real investment --the marriage paperwork was like owning the best stock in the planet that paid REAL dividends in benefits.

So there you have it. A true fatwalleter actually telling you some FINANCIAL reasons to get married --especially at if you are 18 years old and in the military.

Unfortunately I ended up getting divorced (and still single)--but that is story that does not belong in the FW financial thread.

Mikelook like your plan backfired!

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Not really. He had a hot 18 year old wife and great financial and lifestyle benefits by being married while in the military.

Then he got out before her decline.

Sounds like a win win to me

Your assumption was that his financial gain was greater than what he lost/spent in the divorce as well as the stress of going through the divorce. It like it could be awfully close.

biomedeng said:    As a man, I would never willingly have a child with someone without retaining my legal rights to be involved in decision making for the child. Being married helps to secure my involvement, as if I ever get divorced, there is a clear legal mechanism that will allow me to try to best preserve custody of my child.

Don't count on it

JTFH said:   vranaco said:   The benefits you mentioned are the benefits of being in a relationship, not the benefits of making a government contract out of said relationship. This a thousand times over... It's absolutely puzzling that so many non-religious people are obsessed with this "right" which is essentially a sacrament handed out by the government.

The loss of various options (ie: 2 heads of 2 households) and increased potential for disastrous complications makes a govt contract marriage not very attractive to me... Personally I'd like to keep her and my tax situations fluid and agile rather the the all the stupid "can't visit them when they're dying in the hospital" rhetoric...

And don't get me started on the divorce-child support-day car industrial complex!Most importantly, this is the only contract that I know of where one (government) of the three parties in the contract ( him/her/government) gets to have ability to change the terms of the contract after the contract is executed -and- after the contract is terminated.

mwa423 said:   runaway76 said:   
18year old making $70k pays $11,250 in taxes.

Bull. There is no way any single male in the military at 18 makes 70k in income without some insane scam on the side.

Assume nuclear bonus pays in a high-cost of living area like San Diego...