Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ZeroBonus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ^ uh weddings dont generate ROI for human kind? > I > > think the wedding planning/tourism/flower > > > shop/catering/hospitality/liquor/clothing/jewelry/ > > > greeting card industries would beg to differ. > > > No, useless consumer luxury items such as greeting > cards do not generate an ROI for human kind. Yes, > they generate a short term financial profit, but > as the US is finding out right now, tangible > production is king when it comes to long run > sustainability. So we should think about the long run sustainability in everything we do? I guess people should stop watching movies, stop spending money on luxury cars, stop buying big houses, stop going on vacations, since all of that is useless when it comes to generating ROI for human kind?
^Is that supposed to be a critique of my argument or Swan’s?
I’m going to go out on a very short limb and say that all of the people arguing for pre-nups and against expensive weddings have never had to deal with an actual human bride.
adavydov7 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @Zero:"Are you saying the relationship you share > with your wife is the same as any husband shares > with his wife? " > Absolutely, especially at the outset. There is > nothing that makes me substantially different > married couples to make me OBJECTIVELY think that > the conditional probability for me and her would > be less than the average, i.e. there is nothing > special about any of us. So you are saying the couple that eloped to Vegas one month after meeting each other has the same probability of their marriage lasting as a couple that dated for several years and finally decided to get married? There are just way too many assumptions one has to consider to justify a 50% divorce rate as a scientifically proven statistic that applies to all Once again marriage is not a coin flip.
adavydov7 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^Is that supposed to be a critique of my argument > or Swan’s? Swan is arguing that spending money on wedding is useless, well then by his argument so is spending money on any luxury item out there.
ZeroBonus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > adavydov7 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > @Zero:"Are you saying the relationship you > share > > with your wife is the same as any husband > shares > > with his wife? " > > Absolutely, especially at the outset. There is > > nothing that makes me substantially different > > married couples to make me OBJECTIVELY think > that > > the conditional probability for me and her > would > > be less than the average, i.e. there is nothing > > special about any of us. > > So you are saying the couple that eloped to Vegas > one month after meeting each other has the same > probability of their marriage lasting as a couple > that dated for several years and finally decided > to get married? > > There are just way too many assumptions one has to > consider to justify a 50% divorce rate as a > scientifically proven statistic that applies to > all > > Once again marriage is not a coin flip. I would actually say they do.
High divorce rates have nothing to do with pre-nups sor expensive wedding- they have to do with wealthy societies of spoiled, self-entitled insecure women AND men who always think the grass is greener and worry more about boosting their own egos on a public stage than actually being a family. gripe over
@Zero: I don’t know, and that’s the point. It’s an unconditional probability for a reason. I could give you similar anecdotal evidence to the contrary, for instance if my wife were to be American the divorce rate would increase quite a bit beyond 50% (foreign women divorce with lower frequently than do American women). But regardless none of these conditioning factors would reduce the probability of divorce to a level that is so low that I am comfortable putting my entire financial wealth on the line. I agree with akanska completely btw.
ZeroBonus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So we should think about the long run > sustainability in everything we do? Uh, yes? Are you familiar with the current economic climate and how we got here? > I guess people > should stop watching movies, People are actually educated by some movies, but as far as curbing it, yes, I’m fine, read a book. > stop spending money on luxury cars, Yes? What would be the downside on that? > stop buying big houses, Yes again? See 2008 mortage crisis. > stop going on vacations, I might use the education argument here as well as the argument for health and stress relief which improve long run productivity. > since all of that is useless when it comes to generating ROI for human kind? Yeah, I don’t know if you could tell from my first argument, but I’m obviously against flagrant materialism and waste so I was on board with most of that. If you’ve got money to blow, throw it towards charity. I’m also kind of green, so I’m down with less waste.
So, as opposed to how many marriages end in divorce, how many people who get married end up divorced? My sample might be biased, but far fewer than 50% of people I know are divorced. Could the 50% rate be driven up by a minority of the population that get married 3 or more times?
I think we can leave it at the fact that everyone has a different situation and before making a decision, all factors should be considered. The right answer for me is not necessarily the right answer for you.
Financial distress is one of the top cited factors in divorce among average couples. If you’re well to do, there’s probably a reason you know a smaller sampling. It also supports not initiating your marriage by blowing $$. But I also agree with you point about repeaters.
@Walrus: again, from my above post “regardless none of these conditioning factors would reduce the probability of divorce to a level that is so low that I am comfortable putting my entire financial wealth on the line.” As well as the fact that when you enter the marriage pool for the first time you don’t know how many times you will marry so you have no reliable conditioning data about future marriages. I still maintain that 50% is probably a fairly good estimator for planning purposes.
adavydov7 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think you are thinking about this backwards. The trick is to marry wealthy old ladies who are on their death beds, and then cash out.
^I’m always game for some reverse cradle-robbing:)
Hello Mister Walrus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > adavydov7 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > I think you are thinking about this backwards. The > trick is to marry wealthy old ladies who are on > their death beds, and then cash out. MILF’s MILF’s MILF’s! MILF’s MILF’s MILF’s! MILF’s MILF’s MILF’s! MILF’s MILF’s MILF’s! Now you gentleman know where I am coming from.
You need to marry a rich girl like I did. That way the wedding is paid for and you have a big chunk of cash waiting in a trust for you. It’s awesome. Plus she is an only child, so no sharing. Oh, and I love her too, so I guess that counts for something.
yeah, my girlfriend’s husband is super rich and it is the only way I will go from now on.
^Hahaha did she sign a prenup?
nah, I am just joking, he isnt rich.