
INTJ emotionally conflicted virgo
@coldwateryvirgo
8 Years500+ PostsVirgo
Comments: 132 · Posts: 837 · Topics: 85


Posted by maiden
When kids and property taxes come into the picture it's a different ballgame. Also when persons incomes go up high enough to move up the tax bracket it is your best situation. It touches a lot of things financially.


Posted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.

Posted by LadyNeptune
Better rights when it comes to illness and hospitalization of your SO.
Tax breaks (marital tax deduction, + joint filing)
After 8 (or 10 can't remember) years of marriage you are eligible to draw on your spouses social security.
IRA benefits
If you are married and your spouse passes away and you inherit the estate you will not have to pay taxes on the inheritance (if not legally married you will need to).
Leave benefits through employer when spouse's relative passes away etc.
Health insurance benefits (being able to be added to your spouses plan) especially useful if your spouse is unionized or works for the government.
Also studies show married people live longer than single, or cohabitation couples.
And the most IMPORTANT benefit is to women who wish to have a child. You will need to put your career on hold at least for a few years to raise the child. Marriage gives you 50% entitlement to your spouses earning (in the event of a divorce even with a prenup) which protects your time and energy being put into the kid instead of furthering your own earning potential.


Posted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.
I forgot to say that I’m speaking from a women perspective
That there are no incentives for a successful women to get married
Why do you say that? What disincentives are there? What if you want children?click to expand

Posted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by LadyNeptune
Better rights when it comes to illness and hospitalization of your SO.
Tax breaks (marital tax deduction, + joint filing)
After 8 (or 10 can't remember) years of marriage you are eligible to draw on your spouses social security.
IRA benefits
If you are married and your spouse passes away and you inherit the estate you will not have to pay taxes on the inheritance (if not legally married you will need to).
Leave benefits through employer when spouse's relative passes away etc.
Health insurance benefits (being able to be added to your spouses plan) especially useful if your spouse is unionized or works for the government.
Also studies show married people live longer than single, or cohabitation couples.
And the most IMPORTANT benefit is to women who wish to have a child. You will need to put your career on hold at least for a few years to raise the child. Marriage gives you 50% entitlement to your spouses earning (in the event of a divorce even with a prenup) which protects your time and energy being put into the kid instead of furthering your own earning potential.
I guess I’m coming from a perspective where I have no desire to draw from spouse ira since I have need desire for his earning since I’m financially secure , im talking about two people of incomes around 100000+ when say financially stable
And I’m only speaking for myself that if I get divorce I wouldn’t care for half of his earning . Especially if I’m already the one earning more
I have heard that married people live longer , but I think it might be attributed to risk taking behaviors of single , not the marriage itself
I do like the family insurance plan that you get from marriage thoughclick to expand


Posted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.
I forgot to say that I’m speaking from a women perspective
That there are no incentives for a successful women to get married
Why do you say that? What disincentives are there? What if you want children?
I’m not having disincentives for the scenario, I am saying there’s no benefit to doing so
And the child would be raised in same nuclear home , with both a mother n father in their home as any other parents .
The only different is They just never signed a marriage license .
@ladyneptune covered it well but there are a number of financial and property incentives for a woman to get married. They were mostly created to avoid spousal abandonment.click to expand

Posted by coldwateryvirgo
Assuming you’re gonna be financially stable , what are the reasons if any to officially sign a marriage license ?
Especially with chance of divorce about 50:50
You can just be in a serious relationship with someone, living with each other and treating everything the same as a marriage
And just go separate ways if you are no longer happy together

Posted by coldwateryvirgo
I’m gonna clarify that in this scenario , you live pretty much like a married couple , the only difference is not official signing a marriage, as I believe in no benefit of making the marriage official by law .
For example you might even have had a whole wedding and everything. But you’re not obligated but financial circumstances to stay in a marriage, the only thing that would force you to feel like you must stay is your own desire . You can leave without the hassle of a divorce if you choose to do so

Posted by tizianiPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.
I forgot to say that I’m speaking from a women perspective
That there are no incentives for a successful women to get married
Why do you say that? What disincentives are there? What if you want children?
I’m not having disincentives for the scenario, I am saying there’s no benefit to doing so
And the child would be raised in same nuclear home , with both a mother n father in their home as any other parents .
The only different is They just never signed a marriage license .
@ladyneptune covered it well but there are a number of financial and property incentives for a woman to get married. They were mostly created to avoid spousal abandonment.
She's saying if the woman is already wealthy.
In which case I reckon she is correct.
Risk of spousal abandonment only goes up when a woman is already well. She wouldn't have any need to mitigate against that. Her best way of avoiding that is not to get married.click to expand


Posted by tizianiPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by tizianiPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by tizianiPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.
I forgot to say that I’m speaking from a women perspective
That there are no incentives for a successful women to get married
Why do you say that? What disincentives are there? What if you want children?
I’m not having disincentives for the scenario, I am saying there’s no benefit to doing so
And the child would be raised in same nuclear home , with both a mother n father in their home as any other parents .
The only different is They just never signed a marriage license .
@ladyneptune covered it well but there are a number of financial and property incentives for a woman to get married. They were mostly created to avoid spousal abandonment.
She's saying if the woman is already wealthy.
In which case I reckon she is correct.
Risk of spousal abandonment only goes up when a woman is already well. She wouldn't have any need to mitigate against that. Her best way of avoiding that is not to get married.
Yea , I think I confused people when I said financially stable , since that has different meaning for different people .
The only thing I'm not sure about is how kids factor into it. It differs from country to country.
I don’t think marital status factors into child maintenance, not in the UK and US anyway.
Ok fair enough. I heard they are different tax breaks for raising a family but I've no real clue.click to expand

Posted by hydorah
tax-wise it's only interesing if both people are working. Otherwise the win is not enough to compensate the burden of life expenses on a single salary.

Posted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by hydorah
tax-wise it's only interesing if both people are working. Otherwise the win is not enough to compensate the burden of life expenses on a single salary.
I’m not suggesting living on a single income , I’m wuggestibg not signing a marriage license
Life expenses would still be shared , you live together you help each other out financially, you’re not paying for everything on a single salary vs a two person salary .
You share your income n earn .
You’re just not officially signing a marriage license .
click to expand

Posted by tizianiPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by tizianiPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by tizianiPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturnsPosted by coldwateryvirgoPosted by AnotherTaurusGuyReturns
If you’re a woman then yes.
I forgot to say that I’m speaking from a women perspective
That there are no incentives for a successful women to get married
Why do you say that? What disincentives are there? What if you want children?
I’m not having disincentives for the scenario, I am saying there’s no benefit to doing so
And the child would be raised in same nuclear home , with both a mother n father in their home as any other parents .
The only different is They just never signed a marriage license .
@ladyneptune covered it well but there are a number of financial and property incentives for a woman to get married. They were mostly created to avoid spousal abandonment.
She's saying if the woman is already wealthy.
In which case I reckon she is correct.
Risk of spousal abandonment only goes up when a woman is already well. She wouldn't have any need to mitigate against that. Her best way of avoiding that is not to get married.
Yea , I think I confused people when I said financially stable , since that has different meaning for different people .
The only thing I'm not sure about is how kids factor into it. It differs from country to country.
I don’t think marital status factors into child maintenance, not in the UK and US anyway.
Ok fair enough. I heard they are different tax breaks for raising a family but I've no real clue.click to expand

Posted by maiden
When kids and property taxes come into the picture it's a different ballgame. Also when persons incomes go up high enough to move up the tax bracket it is your best situation. It touches a lot of things financially.

Posted by WitchmitchAriesPosted by maiden
When kids and property taxes come into the picture it's a different ballgame. Also when persons incomes go up high enough to move up the tax bracket it is your best situation. It touches a lot of things financially.
very trueclick to expand

Posted by Scotteh007
"You can just be in a serious relationship with someone, living with each other and treating everything the same as a marriage
And just go separate ways if you are no longer happy together "
I'd rather have that.
My Dad and my stepmom just got married this year after being together for about 10-15 years. For tax reasons.

Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →
Especially with chance of divorce about 50:50
You can just be in a serious relationship with someone, living with each other and treating everything the same as a marriage
And just go separate ways if you are no longer happy together