Comments on: Dilemma Friday: For Richer Or Poorer?

By: Kick a Bitch

Kick a Bitch — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:52:08 +0000

lol, and you wonder why men pump-and-dump you…

By: Ames

Ames — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:05:49 +0000

Mama always said it’s just as easy to love a rich man as a poor man. I married (and divorced) the poor man. She was right.

Please, pass Nathan my way

By: byrdloves2read

byrdloves2read — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:11:03 +0000

In my youth, I was in a similar situation. Then I chose Peter. Now, I’m older, much more mature and, from your descriptions, Nathan appeals to me, not because of the money, just his personality. Lover not a fighter doesn’t appeal to me at all anymore.

By: Teddypig

Teddypig — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 14:46:54 +0000

Momma may have
Poppa may have
But God Bless The Child who’s got his own

I guess I decided rather young to be the one making the bucks. But I’m also a gay guy so…

By: Senenca

Senenca — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 13:48:42 +0000

I’d go with the rich guy, because I like his personality better.
The lover not a fighter thing turns me off. That poor guys seems kinda passive, which is another big turn off.

By: Treva Harte

Treva Harte — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 13:15:50 +0000

Tough call. I get really irked with people who are financially irresponsible and, frankly, why is Peter figuring we can go on a date and expecting me to pay? OTOH I don’t mind a bit of cutting humor but if Nathan turns that on me or does it too often to others, it won’t be pretty. Since I’m not sure why I have to choose one — have either of them mentioned anything permanent or worthwhile as a couple? — I think I have to pass on them both.

By: Karen Scott

Karen Scott — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:03:17 +0000

Kirsten, I couldn’t agree with you more. Lack of money is one of the main causes of strain in relationships. I’m not advocating marrying purely for money, but I do think that as you get older, one becomes more practical about these matters.

The laughter is more likely to turn to tears if you’re constantly worrying about how to pay your mortgage or feed your family.

By: West

West — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:11:07 +0000

Peter, hands down. It’s always got to be the one who makes me laugh and who I can make laugh. If I want something, I can buy it my damn self.

By: kirstensaell

kirstensaell — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 06:08:53 +0000

I’m wondering if age has an impact on the answers given. I feel very curmudgeonly (sp?) saying ‘the money’, but also know at 20 or 25 my answer may have been different.

Curmudgeonly or not, yeah, I was willing to live poor at 23, and I’m not remotely prepared to settle for that anymore. But at 23, I had no idea that a man with a modest to low income in a non-career-oriented job was almost certainly going to see his income go down over the years, rather than up. So we started out poor, but with him carrying most of the load, and ended up poor with ME carrying almost all the load.

Now, when I meet a man who has pots of money, I’m not thinking “Yay! Can’t wait to get my hands on it!” More like “Yay, I don’t have to support this guy!”

The only people who say money isn’t important tend to be those who have enough of it.

By: Cherrie Lynn

Cherrie Lynn — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 04:57:52 +0000

Nathan for me. I’m reserved myself. I don’t need to be treated like a queen, I just need to feel comfortable and secure. That seems much easier when you don’t have money problems.

I agree with Sam that my answer might have been different several years ago. But knowing how it feels to scrape and scrounge and worry about bills and kids has impacted my ideas about what I need in a partner and what makes me happy.

Money can’t buy happiness, but love can’t pay the bills. Find them both if at all possible.