Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think that money...

50 replies

Steaktartar · 15/07/2019 21:09

AIBU to think that money, or rather, security is more important than love? I've often been criticized but i do get annoyed at people's comments like, ' money will come' or ' love will find a way'. Especially in today's world

OP posts:
MonstranceClock · 15/07/2019 21:12

I find people are either or. I had this conversation with a friend the other day. I said I would never date a man who earnt less than me. Where as she thinks that if you love someone it shouldn't matter. Neither is wrong, just different ways of looking at things.

OneRingToRuleThemAll · 15/07/2019 21:32

DH is unemployed, but solvent. If he doesn't have money that's fine with me, he pulls his weight in other ways. If he earned well but lived beyond his means that would be a dealbreaker.

SimonJT · 15/07/2019 21:49

I don’t agree, I had far less worries (and was happier) when I had far far less money.

PookieDo · 15/07/2019 21:52

I would be in big shit if I had no money
But I am not in big shit with no husband or boyfriend

So pretty much that is how it is for me

One is a need the other a desire IMO

hazell42 · 15/07/2019 22:05

Financial independence is more important than love.

Money that is attached to someone else is not yours, and if they leave, they tend I take nost of it with them

If you are financially independent you can pick whatever pleases you most

CuffAww · 15/07/2019 22:17

I'd rather have love, or rather be loved, and have the gift of a happy family over money anyday. Always.

You can be happy if you're poor but you can't be happy if you're lonely and rejected.

BogglesGoggles · 15/07/2019 22:24

I think it depends on the individual. Some people are so emotionally needy they’d kill themselves if they weren’t loved. For people who meet their own emotional needs more pragmatic factors are most important. This includes money-to an extent. But so does love, when your spouse loves you more than you love them that gives power-something that abusive people often seek out. The way I see it is money is easily lost (even very wealthy people are living precarious lives-look at the Romanovs, they were the wealthiest family in the world and they ended up dead!) you need to look at a person and ask yourself what you’ll have left if the relative security you achieve is stripped away. If you couldn’t depend on that person to get you through a zombie apocalypse then they’re not worth marrying.

BogglesGoggles · 15/07/2019 22:26

@CuffAww being ‘lonely’ and rejected wouldn’t really bother me. Being poor would be a problem. Not a huge one but way way bigger a problem than being rejected.

ChangedNameForToday · 15/07/2019 22:27

Have a look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Basic needs of food, shelter, security and safety come first, then relationships second. So yes, security is more important than love. You can't survive on love without security.

www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

CuffAww · 15/07/2019 22:30

@BogglesGoggles I'd easily swap what finances I have for a happy family...

Emi1e · 15/07/2019 22:31

The research suggests that wealth plays a very small part in our happiness, to the point that once our basic needs are met the benefits beyond that are negligible.

Lumene · 15/07/2019 22:32

I would not choose to be filthy rich but with no one to love.

However I wouldn’t want to be on the poverty line either.

Purpletigers · 15/07/2019 22:38

If I could only have one I’d have the security . Being madly in love without any financial security would be my worse nightmare . I couldn’t bring children into that situation.

raspberryk · 15/07/2019 22:58

FYI regarding Maslow's hierarchy of needs, it has now been researched and established that you do not need to achieved all of the basic needs before "progressing" to the next tier.
In addition, you don't need huge amounts of money for security.
A lot of people would think my boyfriend and I have no money, we pretty much don't and we don't place a huge importance on it, however we have enough to be relatively secure, in our opinion. Our level of security might be perceived very differently to someone who places value on larger bank balances, owning homes outright, savings etc.
I can assure you you can still love even if you're homeless.

AlexaAmbidextra · 15/07/2019 23:02

Well I look at it this way. If I was lonely, which I’m not, I’d rather be lonely in comfort than lonely and not able to pay the rent.

BlueSkiesLies · 15/07/2019 23:02

I wouldn’t be attracted to someone who didn’t earn a decent living in the first place.

I am not interested in subsidising another adult.

However I expect that being in love with the person, not the money they make, makes it easier to deal with any unfortunate change in circumstances like illness or job loss.

Ellisandra · 15/07/2019 23:08

There isn’t a simple formula for how much money = security though.

I have far more money saved for a rainy day than my boyfriend. But he is quite happy go lucky and believes something will always turn up. Whereas I am quite pessimistic.

So he feels pretty secure even though he has perhaps a tenth of my savings.

I left a shit marriage to a good earner who was set to inherit 500K. I’m not sure I chose love over security - but I certainly chose happiness. But, that was with a certain level of financial cushion.

Zenithbear · 15/07/2019 23:10

I would always choose love over money. I have more money than my other half. I'm happy to share some of my fortune with him. I haven't earned it all, it's mostly equity from my divorce. He maintains our three houses amongst doing a million other things. We have a lovely life together, stability is not just about money. We could both be independent financially. We choose not to.

DogbertDogglesworth · 15/07/2019 23:13

Pay a few million into my bank account and i'll let you know.

BackforGood · 15/07/2019 23:15

YABU.
Though not sure why it needs to be one or the other.

I presume in the either / or choice the person 'without money' has enough of the stuff to meet basic shelter / food requirements, and that you are talking about "being better off" ?

We are hard wired to need relationships, as humans - we yearn to be loved, or at the very least 'liked' by our parents, our siblings, our children. By our friends and by romantic partners. Indeed, we thrive if we are liked by 'people we meet' too - it has a huge impact on the happiness of the overwhelming majority of people.
There will be exceptions, and maybe you are one of them, OP ?

Lifeisabeach09 · 15/07/2019 23:24

It is very individual and subjective.
As someone living paycheque to paycheque, money is way more important to me than, say, romantic love. But not the love of my child.
It's interesting that some PPs (with money) have stated that they would choose love. Is it because that money is not a constraint and so all they need is love?!
It's very philosophical.

Purpletigers · 15/07/2019 23:37

I don’t think you can genuinely be poor and happy . Comfortable and happy yes but not poor and happy . Not really !

Purpletigers · 16/07/2019 00:27

Ellisandra - there is way to measure wealth/ security . If your income from your assets covers your expenses without going to work then you’re wealthy .
If you’re using your pay check to finance your liabilities eg mortgage , car etc then you can never be wealthy .
It’s not about how much you make but how much you keep - and how many generations you keep it for !

raspberryk · 16/07/2019 11:27

Purple tigers yes you can, I was happier with ZERO income and the threat of homelessness after I separated from my XH than when I was with him and he brought a 6 figure income home. My current DP have very little more than zero now, actually we are usually in the minus before payday and I don't even care right now. I know it wont always be like that and we love each other, neither of us care that we don't earn much at the moment. When I am qualified he will probably give up work altogether or go part time and that wont stop me loving him either.

bringthethunder · 16/07/2019 11:33

Im solvent but not well off. Some months I won't have any funds to go out or do any entertainment type things. I'm perfectly content to sit on the sofa and watch a movie. It's nicer to do nothing with a partner though. In those instances i.e. if you're going to have no oney anyway, then love wins.

On the other hand, my ExH never worked a day in his life, spent all the money that I worked hard for and I left him. So I suppose when push came to shove, when my partner was abusing the status quo, I chose finance over love. I don't mind being skint if the little I do have is my own, but when I need to share the little I have, then I'm not so happy....