Dating someone who has less than you

AmyTurtle

When I met OH 5 years ago he was a penniless, carless student working part time in Primark - he had decided to leave a career in accountancy and retrain in computer science. I was in full time employment and at that time my income was much higher than his. Now he has been out of Uni 3 years his salary is getting on for double mine but it's never really caused issues either way - he was a good bet then and he still is now

lynsayjane

fierystormcloud wrote: »

Are you not sort of contradicting yourself a bit there?

I don't see how. When I marry I will marry for love, if it ends it will be because the love has ended. My money will be mine at the start and the end as his will be.
Previous posters seem to be saying that joining in marriage is joining financially, I don't believe that it has to be.

missbiggles1

bugslet wrote: »

I might agree with you on poor values, but lack of education.....guess I'm out of luck there then, having only A levels. I did get accepted into uni, but never really wanted to go and embarked on the stunning career of forklift driver. Look, 3 million unemployed, at least I was working!:o Since then I've moved on and run my own company for the last 24 years, I'm certainly not thick; I just think ruling out people for not going to uni is as bad as ruling people out for mismatched earning power.



^^^ That



Mr Bugs left school at 15 and joined the Swedish Merchant Navy, had something of a chequered career to put it mildly, but he was one of the smartest men I've met despite being academically 'deficient'.

I'd not be compatible with someone who wasn't intelligent, but academic qualifications are only one indicator.

I never mentioned academic qualications - I said "educated".

FBaby

I also stated that if I were to marry a partner I'd not be looking to take from them any more than I'd want them to be looking to take from me.

It's all about perception. You refer to as 'take' in relation to marriage, I see as 'support'.

I also consider that money is far from the only thing a partner brings into marriage. Some might bring in the dosh, but the other might bring psychological/emotional support and that can be as if not more valuable.

Marriage is a risk whatever you bring into it. You might end up losing out, however, if it works well, then what you will have in a strong mariage is what many people just dream of having.

missbiggles1

AubreyMac wrote: »

I'm not trying to convince anyone otherwise, but just pointing out that I believe it comes down to personalities.

I think someone with good people skills do get further, whatever the sector of the job (it's not what you know but who you know kinda thing, again sector dependant).

You can get two people with the same qualification but one can be better at engaging with people, be open minded and naturally draws people to them and the other can be good at doing the practicalities of the work but doesn't give out a good vibe.

That's not what having "good people skills" means!

lynsayjane

FBaby wrote: »

It's all about perception. You refer to as 'take' in relation to marriage, I see as 'support'.

I also consider that money is far from the only thing a partner brings into marriage. Some might bring in the dosh, but the other might bring psychological/emotional support and that can be as if not more valuable.

Marriage is a risk whatever you bring into it. You might end up losing out, however, if it works well, then what you will have in a strong mariage is what many people just dream of having.

Support works well when the relationship is together, what I'm talking about is not losing if it ends. At no point did I say I wouldn't support a partner/husband who hit hard times or who was trying to improve. In fact the second relationship I spoke of I was incredibly supportive of his going back into education and when we split he thanked me for the confidence I gave him in doing that. What I couldn't deal with in that situation was the 30/40 mile round trip I had to make every time we wanted to see each other, despite having a bus pass he'd make excuses so I had to pick him up. There were various other things I won't get into but he was definitely one of lifes 'takers'. I know that friends of his (who I'm still in contact with) are having the same difficulties.

AubreyMac

lynsayjane wrote: »

I don't see how. When I marry I will marry for love, if it ends it will be because the love has ended. My money will be mine at the start and the end as his will be.
Previous posters seem to be saying that joining in marriage is joining financially, I don't believe that it has to be.

I think to an extent it does have to be (it would certainly make life easier).

What if the higher earner wants to eat in a posh restaurant but the other couldn't afford to? and what if one falls ill or can't work due to health for a while, would they 'owe' it to the partner who supports them?

pinkandblueshoe

Ive never really understood the argument that if you don't do a job exactly related to your degree it must be a waste. I've never done a job that related to my degree. Ive done more than one job that did relate to both my postgrads (they were in similar fields, one more specialised) and now my job has nothing to do with any of those qualifications. But they were certainly worth doing. Even the structure of studying and meeting deadlines was good for me when I retrained again as I had to sit both practical and theory exams.

Loads of people do degrees that don't lead to them going into a career that exactly matches that degree and it can be for so many reasons, not liking the degree in the end, not being able to find a job in that specific area of work, just circumstance.

I think its a bit of a blinkered view, more than blinkered if people think if you do a degree in a certain subject and don't find a job that matches that subject, then it's been a waste of time.

It's absolutely not the case. Also with respect to earnings, some graduate jobs are much better paid than others and some people who don't have a degree and go straight to work end up earning much more anyway.

I'd never look down on someone who didn't have a degree, nor would I look down on someone who had a certain job, but Id never assume that that person doing that certain job didn't have an education or wasn't happy doing that job.

It's happiness that matters in the end as far as I'm concerned, some jobs aren't worth doing and if someone does work in a shop for instance and suffered less stress than working in a high powered job but had a degree, Id never say, you wasted your degree because you chose to do one career/job over the other.

We don't know what's led someone to choosing one path over another and it's unwise to make assumptions.

lynsayjane

AubreyMac wrote: »

I think to an extent it does have to be (it would certainly make life easier).

What if the higher earner wants to eat in a posh restaurant but the other couldn't afford to? and what if one falls ill or can't work due to health for a while, would they 'owe' it to the partner who supports them?

I had the posh restaurant situation, I paid. Just like I paid for the hotel, the fuel.... He knew we had plans to go away and instead of saving he bought a ps3.
I guess the sickness thing depends on the situation. If I were married of course I'd support my husband in tough times and no, I wouldn't be keeping a tally. But if he decided that he just didn't want to work and expected me to pay the bills, that's a completely different situation.

AubreyMac

missbiggles1 wrote: »

That's not what having "good people skills" means!

It is. Well, it's what I mean anyway. Perhaps I'm not explaining myself well (I'm uneducated after all ).

If someone is a natural people's person and gets on with people, I think they're more likely to be promoted or hired etc as they give out a better vibe/impression.

I've worked with Social Workers for a few years and have seen good and bad ones. What makes them (in my opinion) 'good' or 'bad' is their personality. The good ones genuinely care about their work and about the people they deal with. The bad ones can be very judgemental of someone's circumstances and strive to get the results delivered by, from what I have seen, unethical means. However, I'm not sure if Social services is a good example as the sector is so political and bureaucratic anyway (which is why I want out).