Jump to content

What benefits do you get from marriage that you can't get from a de facto LTR?

nexus141

By nexus141
in Marriage and Life Partnerships

 Share
While the thread author can add an update and reopen discussion, this thread was last posted in over a month ago. Want to continue the conversation? Feel free to start a new thread instead!

Recommended Posts

nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
Posted

I've heard a lot of people talk about how they want to get married and all that stuff. My whole attitude towards marriage is "What's the point?" Whenever I raise that question, some people begin to list the benefits of marriage. I want to know what benefits marriage gives you that you CANNOT get from a de facto long term relationship. Love and emotional satisfaction don't count because you can have both in a de facto relationship. From my perspective, the only thing that marriage gives you is a costly legal battle if it fails. Would someone care to point out any benefits of marriage (that you can't get from a de facto relationship) that I may have missed?

USMCHokie Established Member

USMCHokie

Posted
Posted

Everything that has to do with money. (i.e., income tax, military dependent benefits, interest rates on certain purchases, insurance premiums, etc.)

  • Author
nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Everything that has to do with money. (i.e., income tax, military dependent benefits, interest rates on certain purchases, insurance premiums, etc.)

 

Could you provide some specific explanations? Also, would those savings outweigh the cost of a messy divorce?

USMCHokie Established Member

USMCHokie

Posted
Posted
Could you provide some specific explanations? Also, would those savings outweigh the cost of a messy divorce?

 

Well, first of all, I don't go into a marriage thinking of divorce...

 

But to answer your question:

 

Married people pay less income tax than single people.

 

Military servicemembers get more non-taxable pay for each dependent.

 

Married folks can often get cheaper insurance premiums and interest rates (e.g., mortgages).

 

And divorces can sometimes be quite "cheap" if one or both parties aren't complete jack*sses...so are you a jack*ss...? Or plan on marrying one...? :confused:

carhill Established Member

carhill

Posted
Posted

Well, for the folks who change marital partners like underwear in the tropics, not so much. For folks like my parents, who were married for life, plenty. As the trustee of their estate and manager for my mom's care before she died, I spent hundreds of hours and thousands in legal bills doing things my father could have done (had he been alive) with a simple stroke of the pen and his word. That's the power of the marriage license and contract and that same last name.

 

The only way to really know all of it IMO is to get married. I've been married. I know. I'm also now divorced. I know what that lawsuit is like. Doesn't deter me from being married. I had a great example (my parents) to learn from :)

  • Author
nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
  • Author
Posted
And divorces can sometimes be quite "cheap" if one or both parties aren't complete jack*sses...so are you a jack*ss...? Or plan on marrying one...? :confused:

 

Well the reason why divorce occurs is that one of the spouses is a jack@ss. It's hard to know for sure who you are really marrying because people change. That's a fact of life. They can turn it sour and the laws don't protect the non-jackass spouse from economic exploitation (by the lawyers). It doesn't have to be both of them. Just one can be a jackass and that can result in 20-40k in debt. If the savings on taxes and insurance don't exceed that, then marriage isn't worth it.

USMCHokie Established Member

USMCHokie

Posted
Posted
Well the reason why divorce occurs is that one of the spouses is a jack@ss. It's hard to know for sure who you are really marrying because people change. That's a fact of life. They can turn it sour and the laws don't protect the non-jackass spouse from economic exploitation (by the lawyers). It doesn't have to be both of them. Just one can be a jackass and that can result in 20-40k in debt. If the savings on taxes and insurance don't exceed that, then marriage isn't worth it.

 

I absolutely agree with you here, and that's why marriage shouldn't be something you take lightly...and also make sure you're people picker is working when you "choose" your spouse... :rolleyes::D

musemaj11 Established Member

musemaj11

Posted
Posted

If you have a lot of money, dont get married.

 

Its harder for rich people to attract decent mates who dont see them as an ATM.

Roxanna Established Member

Roxanna

Posted
Posted
Well the reason why divorce occurs is that one of the spouses is a jack@ss. It's hard to know for sure who you are really marrying because people change. That's a fact of life. They can turn it sour and the laws don't protect the non-jackass spouse from economic exploitation (by the lawyers). It doesn't have to be both of them. Just one can be a jackass and that can result in 20-40k in debt. If the savings on taxes and insurance don't exceed that, then marriage isn't worth it.

 

People don't change.

InternationalPlayboy Established Member

InternationalPlayboy

Posted
Posted

No offense or anything, but if this is your view of marriage then you are correct, there are no benefits that you, specifically, can get from marriage that you can't get from a de facto long-term-relationship.

  • Author
nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I absolutely agree with you here, and that's why marriage shouldn't be something you take lightly...and also make sure you're people picker is working when you "choose" your spouse... :rolleyes::D

 

A person can do a very thorough job of finding the right person, but that really doesn't do a lot. People can be faking it all along, they can change their minds about what they want in life, they can later decide that their spouse isn't for them, etc. Why even take the risk if the reward is so marginal?

 

People don't change.

 

Are you kidding? People change all the time. People can change their minds about what they want in life (and if being married isn't in the new picture, then say goodbye to the marriage). Psychological illnesses such as mental depression can take root and make life a living hell for everyone in the family. People can also start to show their negative qualities after the marriage, etc.

 

No offense or anything, but if this is your view of marriage then you are correct, there are no benefits that you, specifically, can get from marriage that you can't get from a de facto long-term-relationship.

 

If that's the case, then you basically answered my question. Before the era of the divorce industry, marriage was a somewhat practical institution. Now, the risks/constraints outweigh any benefits you would get from it in the long run.

ColdFox Established Member

ColdFox

Posted
Posted

The benefits for many people are mostly symbolic, emotional, spiritual. If you don't see them already, nobody can really explain it to you in a way that will make you see it.

 

Marriage is wonderful, in my opinion. The financial and paperwork conveniences aside, although those are very nice too and really greased the wheels with our insurance and financial institutions when my husband died unexpectedly.

allina Established Member

allina

Posted
Posted
The benefits for many people are mostly symbolic, emotional, spiritual. If you don't see them already, nobody can really explain it to you in a way that will make you see it.

 

 

I agree with this.

 

I was never a marriage minded woman, I never had a fantasy of "my special day." But you know what? My wedding day was the most beautiful, amazing and meaningful day of my life. I never realized the emotion and joy that proclaiming my love and commitments to my husband in front of our family and friends would bring me. I am now the wife or an amazing man and I couldn't be happier.

 

We didn't marry for any financial gain, we married to be husband and wife, to be a family. We married to state to each other, and everyone out there "I have your back, I'm in this forever, no matter where life takes us."

 

So now we are officially a family unit. I gained a husband and a ton of in-laws and it's great.

 

I often look at my husband and feel so lucky that he chose me to be his wife.

 

I believe that you can have love and commitment without marriage, but for me it really took things to the next level.

 

If marriage has no meaning to you, that's fine. I've said it in countless anti-marriage threads, some of us value marriage and some don't, that's the way it goes.

NoLongerSad Established Member

NoLongerSad

Posted
Posted

Many people feel that the willingness to formalize a marriage legally represents a higher level of committment to one's partner.

  • Author
nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The benefits for many people are mostly symbolic, emotional, spiritual. If you don't see them already, nobody can really explain it to you in a way that will make you see it.

 

Marriage is wonderful, in my opinion. The financial and paperwork conveniences aside, although those are very nice too and really greased the wheels with our insurance and financial institutions when my husband died unexpectedly.

 

I do see those benefits. I think they are wonderful to have. However, it's hard for a person who looks at things objectively to justify that kind of risk. It's pretty absurd to justify a day of joy and celebration with the risk of being financially unstable and penniless for the rest of your life.

 

I agree with this.

 

I was never a marriage minded woman, I never had a fantasy of "my special day." But you know what? My wedding day was the most beautiful, amazing and meaningful day of my life. I never realized the emotion and joy that proclaiming my love and commitments to my husband in front of our family and friends would bring me. I am now the wife or an amazing man and I couldn't be happier.

 

We didn't marry for any financial gain, we married to be husband and wife, to be a family. We married to state to each other, and everyone out there "I have your back, I'm in this forever, no matter where life takes us."

 

So now we are officially a family unit. I gained a husband and a ton of in-laws and it's great.

 

I often look at my husband and feel so lucky that he chose me to be his wife.

 

I believe that you can have love and commitment without marriage, but for me it really took things to the next level.

 

If marriage has no meaning to you, that's fine. I've said it in countless anti-marriage threads, some of us value marriage and some don't, that's the way it goes.

 

You see marriage as taking it to the next level because it's more committed than dating as bf/gf. A long term partnership also takes things to the next level. The only difference is that it's more down-to-earth and realistic. Marriage represents a level of idealism that is simply out of touch with reality because many relationships do not last for a lifetime and people don't always love each other forever (even if they think they will at first). An de facto ltr aims at reducing some of the financial risks associated with being with someone for a very long time.

 

Many people feel that the willingness to formalize a marriage legally represents a higher level of committment to one's partner.

 

Feelings don't automatically make it so. As divorce records show, people don't follow through with their commitments. IMO a de facto relationship represents an even higher level of commitment. With a marriage, people don't always stay together because they love each other. They may not love each other and may stay together only to avoid the costs of a legal divorce. With a de facto relationship, it takes commitment to a new level. Every day your partner is with you, you know that they are there because they love you and not because they are trapped in a legal contract.

 

But whatever, it's a free country and people are free to put irrational emotions ahead of logic. I won't criticize someone for wanting to get married.

allina Established Member

allina

Posted
Posted

 

You see marriage as taking it to the next level because it's more committed than dating as bf/gf. A long term partnership also takes things to the next level. The only difference is that it's more down-to-earth and realistic. Marriage represents a level of idealism that is simply out of touch with reality because many relationships do not last for a lifetime and people don't always love each other forever (even if they think they will at first). An de facto ltr aims at reducing some of the financial risks associated with being with someone for a very long time.

 

You and I don't see eye to eye on the topic, this was clear from your first post. If you ever fall in love and experience the closeness and commitment that I'm talking about you might understand my point of view more.

If not, that's ok, I was just replying to your post, not trying to change your mind :)

Stung Established Member

Stung

Posted
Posted
I do see those benefits. I think they are wonderful to have. However, it's hard for a person who looks at things objectively to justify that kind of risk. It's pretty absurd to justify a day of joy and celebration with the risk of being financially unstable and penniless for the rest of your life..

 

 

 

Feelings don't automatically make it so. As divorce records show, people don't follow through with their commitments. IMO a de facto relationship represents an even higher level of commitment. With a marriage, people don't always stay together because they love each other. They may not love each other and may stay together only to avoid the costs of a legal divorce. With a de facto relationship, it takes commitment to a new level. Every day your partner is with you, you know that they are there because they love you and not because they are trapped in a legal contract.

 

But whatever, it's a free country and people are free to put irrational emotions ahead of logic. I won't criticize someone for wanting to get married.

 

In the first paragraph, you are referring to a wedding, not a marriage.

 

In the next paragraph, you are assigning the daily commitment of a de facto LTR an 'irrational' symbolism--and a rosy, romantic one-- based on your own subjective emotional interpretation. It just means you have a different interpretation of things, not that your interpretation is superior or somehow more rational.

 

FWIW, there are no guarantees: contract, no contract. I have known LTR that were unhappy and whose partners felt trapped because of children, mortgages, work schedules, health problems, family approval, the weight of years of history together--all with no legal marriage involved. I've seen messy breakups with acrimonious battles over child support, child custody, home ownership, again with no legal marriage involved. On the other hand, I've seen remarkably fast and cheap divorces where everything was amicable and everybody parted ways sad but convinced everything was settled fairly. I have of course also known many successful and content LTRs, some had contracts, some didn't.

GooseChaser Established Member

GooseChaser

Posted
Posted (edited)

If you're afraid of being robbed, don't have children. Presto, no child support. Children deserve parents that trust each other, anyway.

Edited by GooseChaser
lonelyandfrustrated Established Member

lonelyandfrustrated

Posted
Posted

In the US, the federal government extends over a thousand benefits to married persons that are not available to 'de facto LTRs'.

 

If you are married and your spouse dies, you are entitled to collect their social security in retirement. Can't get that from a LTR.

 

Go ask a gay person in a LTR about the benefits of marriage. They'll give you an earful.

musemaj11 Established Member

musemaj11

Posted
Posted
If you're afraid of being robbed, don't have children. Presto, no child support. Children deserve parents that trust each other, anyway.

Or you can marry a richer woman. Oh wait, even rich women want even richer guys. :p

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Author
nexus141 New Member

nexus141

Posted
  • Author
Posted
In the first paragraph, you are referring to a wedding, not a marriage.

 

In the next paragraph, you are assigning the daily commitment of a de facto LTR an 'irrational' symbolism--and a rosy, romantic one-- based on your own subjective emotional interpretation. It just means you have a different interpretation of things, not that your interpretation is superior or somehow more rational.

 

FWIW, there are no guarantees: contract, no contract. I have known LTR that were unhappy and whose partners felt trapped because of children, mortgages, work schedules, health problems, family approval, the weight of years of history together--all with no legal marriage involved. I've seen messy breakups with acrimonious battles over child support, child custody, home ownership, again with no legal marriage involved. On the other hand, I've seen remarkably fast and cheap divorces where everything was amicable and everybody parted ways sad but convinced everything was settled fairly. I have of course also known many successful and content LTRs, some had contracts, some didn't.

 

Yes, I was referring to a wedding in that paragraph since that is what was being mentioned in the post I replied to. The symbolism of a de facto relationship is far better than the symbolism you get from marriage. With marriage, it's just what society expects and people go along with it. In a de facto, the exit sign is lit up nice and bright. The fact that the person hasn't left yet is a clear sign that the relationship is healthy and stable. Not like marriage, where people who may hate each other are locked together for financial purposes.

 

I see what you are saying in the 2nd paragraph. Child custody can be messy, I agree. However, it's better to have a messy child custody case than a messy divorce AND a messy child custody case.

 

The fact that there was fighting over the house stems from the problem that there was no prenup (another must for relationships).

 

In the US, the federal government extends over a thousand benefits to married persons that are not available to 'de facto LTRs'.

 

If you are married and your spouse dies, you are entitled to collect their social security in retirement. Can't get that from a LTR.

 

Go ask a gay person in a LTR about the benefits of marriage. They'll give you an earful.

 

LOL, funny how your example applies mostly to women. It's mostly women who benefit from it since women tend to live a bit longer than men. Would you mind listing the other benefits? Then we shall see if there is anything worthwhile in store for the man.

 

Or you can marry a richer woman. Oh wait, even rich women want even richer guys. :p

 

That's actually a good strategy. Marrying someone of equal income level is a good way of getting around a lot of the legal problems that men face in divorce.

george44 Member

george44

Posted
Posted

There are many reasons to be married and my wife has found most of them.

 

Although it's relatively easy to get a divorce, there are people like me who take their commitment seriously. This means that there is a giant advantage to my wife in being married, because I would have left her if we hadn't been married, and so far I haven't, partially because of my commitment.

 

I owned a home when we were married with a big equity. She kept complaining that it wasn't her house, so I agreed to sell it and buy one that was hers. Now all of a sudden half of my equity is hers. Another big advantage.

 

I make much more money than she does. When we were living together she had her own bank account and could only buy what she could afford. Now that we're married it's a joint account, so she spends much, much more than she makes.

 

I'm sure there are others, but that's a start.

george44 Member

george44

Posted
Posted

Another advantage to being married that my wife has found.

 

She no longer has to pretend to like the things I like and no longer has to do the things I like. When we were dating she probably thought she had to in order to get me to marry her.

Green Established Member

Green

Posted
Posted

Marriage isn't for every one but it does have its advantage. On a spiritual level it is very romantic and a symbol. As for legalities it is a must if you are going to have children. As a man you will have ZERO rights to a child if you are not married. You could be put in a position where a woman simply gives a kid up for adoption... If you're married you actualy are given automatic rights to the child. Plus there really are many tax benefits and protections. You could still find urself in a divorce like situation even if you never got married depending on how long you had been living togather and if you had children... it would just be a lot more messy.

 

Bottom line don't have kids out of marriage and don't invest in things like houses or anything else with a partner if not married.

Stung Established Member

Stung

Posted
Posted
The symbolism of a de facto relationship is far better than the symbolism you get from marriage. With marriage, it's just what society expects and people go along with it. In a de facto, the exit sign is lit up nice and bright. The fact that the person hasn't left yet is a clear sign that the relationship is healthy and stable. Not like marriage, where people who may hate each other are locked together for financial purposes.

 

 

Sorry, but that is just your 'irrational' rosy interpretation again. If it makes you happy then stick with it, but it is just not a fact that you can look at unmarried LTRs and know that they are all happy and functional simply because both people are still there. People can feel trapped together for a variety of reasons, only some of which have anything to do with fear of divorce.

 

It's generally not a good idea to assume that you know what is going on in the inside of other people's relationships--often enough people don't even know what's going on in their own.

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...