Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

I wonder if this lady will find the moneyman of her dreams She says it's a dealbreaker if you don't make $300k per year and have at least $1M in investable assets.

Digit wrote:I wonder if this lady will find the moneyman of her dreams She says it's a dealbreaker if you don't make $300k per year and have at least $1M in investable assets.

Goodness! Reading her article made me feel like I was reading Dickens or Austen's diatribes by petty characters about the importance of marrying for wealth!

The problem with this lady's perspective is that she's confusing having money with having the same ideas about money. Even if she does marry a millionaire who fits the bill, if they don't have the same ideas about how to spend/save/use money, chances are they will have big marital problems. You can have a happy marriage, even if you're tight on money-- you just have to be on the same page about what you do with that money.

Which she kind of says. She doesn't say it's the qualifying feature. Just that it's a requirement. There are other requirements. Probably one of those is someone who is responsible with money.

Honestly, being rich wasn't one of my absolute requirements in a husband, but seeing as how I've always wanted to be a secret philanthropist, it was a "really, really want" requirement. But included with that was a guy who could responsibly use his money and also wanted to be a philanthropist. It was just part of the deal.

Giving away my hard earned money? She better not!

She really drives it in with her very last sentence.

But that’s okay. I never wanted to be virtuous—just rich.

Marduk wrote:Giving away my hard earned money? She better not!

... should I stop donating your money to the Tea Party, then?

Maybe we should move this to a reader response thread?

Welcome to your new home. Still in Random Chatter, because it's not a reader's response to anything we saw on the Board, as far as I can tell...

Oh hey. Somehow I just assumed it was based on a Board question, because I rarely click on links to articles in here. I guess this was an exception.

But thanks, C4, for humoring me anyway.

Too funny In China, at the "Beijing Moral Education Center for Women" (its real name), you can take a $3,080, 30-hour class on how to snag a billionaire. I somehow doubt the billionaires are the ones getting "snagged."

The main hypothesis my observations lead me to make is that while not everyone who grows up poor ends up putting more focus on being rich, a high percentage of the people that put more focus on being rich grew up poor. Admittedly, this is just a conjecture and I don't have data such as polls of people who admit to focusing on wanting to be rich to back it up.

I've actually found it to be just the opposite, Digit.

I guess my sample space of experience could be slanted in that I haven't known very many kids whose families could easily be described as very wealthy.

Digit wrote:I guess my sample space of experience could be slanted in that I haven't known very many kids whose families could easily be described as very wealthy.

I have and I think most of them would be disappointed to have significantly less as adults than they did as children. (But wouldn't we all?)

I think, really, everyone hopes to be rich. It's just that some people recognize that they can still be happy if they're not.