 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
... or divorce us do part...
Do you think a married couples tax allowance would cut the divorce rate?
Apparently the divorce rate is considered to be exceptionally high and a lot of non marrieds use this as justification for not getting wed.
There are no stats available for co-habiting couples who part though so do you think as a species humans are just not cut out for monogamy?
Do you think in relationships where its just the sexual compatability (eg one partner needs more variety)would benefit from being polygamous or 'open' in order to lower the divorce/living together stats, where in all other aspects couples are extremely happy and harmonious.
So would you stay together for love and money? Or a spare in the other bedroom!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Monogamy is NOT natural full stop.
Yes I'd stay married for the money. Each time he punched me i'd say .....
Wellll I get £20 a month for this soooo what the hell..... "
I did differentiate between living harmoniously. Violence should not be tolerated under any circumstances. Really granny, Im surprised at you for expanding the debate that way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Monogamy is NOT natural full stop.
Yes I'd stay married for the money. Each time he punched me i'd say .....
Wellll I get £20 a month for this soooo what the hell.....
I did differentiate between living harmoniously. Violence should not be tolerated under any circumstances. Really granny, Im surprised at you for expanding the debate that way."
Why ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
because it looked as though you hadn't read the thread properly which surprises me as you're usually so thorough. The thread wasnt intended to talk about violence in marriage or co-habiting and Im steering it back to the point. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Monogamy is NOT natural full stop.
Yes I'd stay married for the money. Each time he punched me i'd say .....
Wellll I get £20 a month for this soooo what the hell..... "
We've got a saying that a black man is polygamous by nature. Never knew it's universal  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"because it looked as though you hadn't read the thread properly which surprises me as you're usually so thorough. The thread wasnt intended to talk about violence in marriage or co-habiting and Im steering it back to the point."
You are of course right to say that it appears I have not read the post properly.
In reality I read it thoroughly. More than once in fact because it's poorly written.
I responded in the way I did because that's the mood i'm in.
What ever your intention or which ever way you steer your thread your hand isn't always the only one on the rudder.
I felt all Canotna again.....
Okay he can hit me for fifty ....nothing less |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"because it looked as though you hadn't read the thread properly which surprises me as you're usually so thorough. The thread wasnt intended to talk about violence in marriage or co-habiting and Im steering it back to the point.
You are of course right to say that it appears I have not read the post properly.
In reality I read it thoroughly. More than once in fact because it's poorly written.
I responded in the way I did because that's the mood i'm in.
What ever your intention or which ever way you steer your thread your hand isn't always the only one on the rudder.
I felt all Canotna again.....
Okay he can hit me for fifty ....nothing less "
I agree to a certain extent - however badly you percieve it to be presented the point remains the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Let none go for the jugular please!!!! "
Granny and I are adults we can disagree I believe without non adults waiting in the wings with the popcorn jokes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No tax allowance will bring back the "old" concept of marriage. Politicians who think that have a completely distorted view of modern relationships. Financial independence for women finished that. Surly we should be concentrating on providing committed couples with the financial ability to raise their children.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'd agree with that.
BlackNorwichMale you have ruined this thread......
Now respond properly.
Is the thread ruined?"
Who's the BlackNorwichMale?
How dare he comment on a thread... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"LOL ...... sorry ...
I didn't look but I knew the colour the place and the gender. xx"
Apology accepted on behalf of whom you were referring to. Not me of course?!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"No tax allowance will bring back the "old" concept of marriage. Politicians who think that have a completely distorted view of modern relationships. Financial independence for women finished that. Surly we should be concentrating on providing committed couples with the financial ability to raise their children. "
Those are my feelings to an extent. I know there is lower taxation and family tax credits for everyone on poor incomes anyway, regardless of the marital status within the family I wonder if those would cease? At the moment Im not sure what they are getting at using marriage as a carrot dangling exercise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Married couples tax allowance would NOT cut the divorce rate. In the grand scheme of things it would be such a small amount of money. Divorce is expensive and the financial fallout of getting divorced can resonate for years. If people have decided to split and go through the financial woe anyway, married couples tax allowance isn't going to tip the balance.
The monogamous/polygamous debate is almost a seperate subject. Some species are monogamous, most appear to be polygamous. Human beings are unique, evolution and the refinement of our intelligence means we have a choice, understand that choice, and appreciate the effect those choices have on ourselves, others, and the society in which we live. Intelligence and choice as opposed to instinct may mean we surpress natural urges, but that's part of how we evolve in society.
I suppose the question is whether the traditional western ideal of a monogamous married base is the bedrock of the ideal functional society or not. I think it's too simplistic.
Finally your last question, I have always been uncomfortable with 'imbalance', the idea that a couple can be 'extremely happy and harmonious' over the long term when one is polygamous while the other monogamous is a bit of a stretch for me. I am sure though that there are examples where people are perfectly happy in this situation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No tax allowance will bring back the "old" concept of marriage. Politicians who think that have a completely distorted view of modern relationships. Financial independence for women finished that. Surly we should be concentrating on providing committed couples with the financial ability to raise their children.
Those are my feelings to an extent. I know there is lower taxation and family tax credits for everyone on poor incomes anyway, regardless of the marital status within the family I wonder if those would cease? At the moment Im not sure what they are getting at using marriage as a carrot dangling exercise."
Without getting into a political debate politicians tend to use the marriage bandwagon to appeal to the "average" voter. It's an issue trawled out to solve all the woes of our society...  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Married couples tax allowance would NOT cut the divorce rate. In the grand scheme of things it would be such a small amount of money. Divorce is expensive and the financial fallout of getting divorced can resonate for years. If people have decided to split and go through the financial woe anyway, married couples tax allowance isn't going to tip the balance.
The monogamous/polygamous debate is almost a seperate subject. Some species are monogamous, most appear to be polygamous. Human beings are unique, evolution and the refinement of our intelligence means we have a choice, understand that choice, and appreciate the effect those choices have on ourselves, others, and the society in which we live. Intelligence and choice as opposed to instinct may mean we surpress natural urges, but that's part of how we evolve in society.
I suppose the question is whether the traditional western ideal of a monogamous married base is the bedrock of the ideal functional society or not. I think it's too simplistic.
Finally your last question, I have always been uncomfortable with 'imbalance', the idea that a couple can be 'extremely happy and harmonious' over the long term when one is polygamous while the other monogamous is a bit of a stretch for me. I am sure though that there are examples where people are perfectly happy in this situation. "
I agree fully. See my earlier , erudite and astute posting  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
Finally your last question, I have always been uncomfortable with 'imbalance', the idea that a couple can be 'extremely happy and harmonious' over the long term when one is polygamous while the other monogamous is a bit of a stretch for me. I am sure though that there are examples where people are perfectly happy in this situation. "
I agree but as polygamy is not the social perception or, for want of a better phrase 'the norm' in our country one partner behaving in a manner that has not been agreed by both parties is indeed, plain old cheating on the relationship.
If (but not in my lifetime, I suspect) polygamy comes to the fore or becomes just another accepted 'norm' and/or living arrangement (ground rules all decided by the couple in question) could that perhaps see the cut in divorce rates? Or is divorce here to stay no matter how financially more sound and sexually more satisfied couples within their relationship become?
I only linked the two subjects in my OP because I think the government are, as one poster put it, out of touch with what makes marriages tick and for some sexual fidelity is more important than a tax cut. The stats I was reading said divorce is usually petitioned because of one partner being unfaithful and is the leading cause of divorce so I can't see the point of extra money from a married couples allowance being an incentive to stay together. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"No tax allowance will bring back the "old" concept of marriage. Politicians who think that have a completely distorted view of modern relationships. Financial independence for women finished that. Surly we should be concentrating on providing committed couples with the financial ability to raise their children. "
But isn't that where we went wrong in the first place? Cradle to grave support by the state, where people had children they couldn't afford because they knew that the state (ie: Us!) would support them? These families who rely on state handouts know full well that the children will not be left to starve and without a home. They also know that it is supposed to be best for kids to stay with parents, so all get help!
We waited until we were finacially secure before we had kids. Until we knew we wouldn't have to depend on the state. Pity others don't think the same! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No tax allowance will bring back the "old" concept of marriage. Politicians who think that have a completely distorted view of modern relationships. Financial independence for women finished that. Surly we should be concentrating on providing committed couples with the financial ability to raise their children.
But isn't that where we went wrong in the first place? Cradle to grave support by the state, where people had children they couldn't afford because they knew that the state (ie: Us!) would support them? These families who rely on state handouts know full well that the children will not be left to starve and without a home. They also know that it is supposed to be best for kids to stay with parents, so all get help!
We waited until we were finacially secure before we had kids. Until we knew we wouldn't have to depend on the state. Pity others don't think the same! "
I agree with you to a point, that was why I used the words financial ability. The majority of people want to provide for their families and need the support of decent jobs and good affordable child care facilities rather than payment incentives just for being married. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
We waited until we were finacially secure before we had kids. Until we knew we wouldn't have to depend on the state. Pity others don't think the same! "
Well said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don't think I would ever get married its just not for me. I know loads of couples were together for years then decide to get married after a year they are getting divorced. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Monogamy is NOT natural full stop.
You can get some lovely natural manogomy finishes for worktops in Ikea."
Manogamy is over-rated, Luaun is from the same family of trees but is much cheaper, or should be unless its being passed off as "real" manogamy! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I wouldnt stay with anyone i wasnt happy with regardless of money.
There are also people that choose not to get married or live together even if it means less financial stability
.
The only thing that will cut divorce rate is the fact that less people do/will choose to get married |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think I would ever get married its just not for me. I know loads of couples were together for years then decide to get married after a year they are getting divorced."
It would be a huge assumption to make, that the reason they are getting divorced is because they had a wedding, because essentially, that's all that happened. They had a big party. You have no way of knowing that had they not got married, the outcome wouldn't have still been the same a few years down the line.
Being married is really no different to living together for a long period of time.
In answer to the OP, no I don't think a tax break would encourage people to stay together or get married in the first place. The amount would be negligable and although I think more people need to realise a marriage has to be worked at every single day and not give up so easily, I also don't think people should be staying together if they're unhappy just for the money 
*Her* |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
