Reply to Men 45+ on OLD: are they all broke?

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Men 45+ on OLD: are they all broke?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]I finally met a lovely man. I think he runs deficit of about $700 every month. He works his tail off and didn't buy anything outrages. It's temporary and I will gladly help him fix it. I would even help him if we weren't together.[/quote]

Really? You would financially help a single adult man? Mega turn off.[/quote]

Yeah, nope. I’ve established my life independently and am not tying myself to just another dead weight. [/quote]

So what kind of income/wealth do you expect a man to have?[/quote]

Enough disposable income to match mine. Enough free time to match mine. [/quote]

Sure, but what constitutes matching yours?[/quote]

I'm a woman make about 300K a year. My average weekend outing is about $150; I take one large vacation a year at about $20K, couple small trips in the range of $5k. So it's about $15,000 on travel and $3600 on dates that a BF would need to match my expenses on entertainment and travel only. If we move in together, we would be saving on mortgage/rent so not a bad deal for him overall[/quote]

I’m similar to you financially as are most of my friends.  We’ve all come to realize that we are the ones that can afford our lifestyle.  It means we don’t date and while we miss it, we don’t miss the drama that goes along with being in a relationship.  We go out together on the weekends and always have a good time.  And we travel together.  I haven’t met a man in a similar financial situation yet.[/quote]

Yea, because if he makes less he will resent the woman for making more, will be emasculated causing all the relationship drama. I tried to subsidize men financially, it didn't work out well either (these were professional men making about 200K but with CS obligtions which I don't have). So I guess single wealthy women should prepare for solitude entering elderly years[/quote]

You want the older widowers. The ones I know were happily married, have adult children, and now have substantial assets but no one to share their lives with. We’re talking 60s and 70s. [/quote]

I’ll focus on them in my 50s and 60s if I still feel like dating at that point. For now I have a younger FWB as I’m mid 40s. [/quote]

No way am I spending my 50s and 60s taking care of an old man who won’t be there to take care of me and leaves his property to kids from his marriage.[/quote]

Why should he take care of you or leave you anything if you’ve got your own money?
[/quote]

If I devote my one and only life to someone long term until death, I expect to be treated like a partner and would do the same for a partner / husband.[/quote]

You expect your wealth to pass to your kids.

You also expect his wealth to pass to you, and not to his kids.

You're just another gold-digger.[/quote]

Not the PP, but in middle age marriages there could be a mix of individual and joint assets and income streams. If both are earning equally and bought a house, for example, making a downpayment during their marriage, I don’t see why this house should go to kids. A spouse on the title inherits it by law. Same with life insurance or pensions: these assets are typically split between spouse and kids as inheritance, pro-rata the share accumulated during marriage or something like that. [/quote]

A house would be bought mostly with premarital money which is exactly what you want to leave to your kids. I also want life insurance and pension to go to the kids. A second spouse shouldn’t even need the life insurance or pension, they will have their own money.

Easier to not get married than to try and disentangle what the kids should get vs what the new spouse should get.[/quote]

A 25% downpayment for the house would be from pre-martial founds (and can be 50:50) but it’s jointly owned in entirety by spouses, mortgage is paid from marital funds, all maintenance and renovations. Thus both spouses are equity owners benefiting from its growth. Only a stupid person would agree to give downpayment money or be on a mortgage note but not on a deed. I personally would never move into a house that’s not joint  or which I would have to vacate if my partner dies. It’s such a stress in older age! 
Men usually marry younger and there is a high component of caregiving for their spouses in older age. I’ve seen couples with 15-30 years difference where the wife had to completely forgo her lifestyle, travel in her 60s etc, to make sure the husband survives. If he lacks integrity and appreciation of her sacrifices and doesn’t feel like giving back some of it in the form of life insurance, that is unfit partner. He should live alone in seniors community, and pay for his care (which is not cheap btw!) 
Adult children are not the ones holding your hand in old age, in some cases they fail even to call parents. And they should be getting enough already from both mom and dad’s premarital funds. There is usually a pre-martial component in all pensions etc which can be easily appraised by actuary.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics