Discover what's new & improved in the MyFitnessPal app!
We’re dedicated to helping you achieve your health and nutrition goals. And our newest features and updates? They do just that. Learn how we're making tracking your progress easier, faster, and more motivating than ever.

Do You Want a 20 Year Marriage?

Options
2»

Replies

  • bradphil87
    bradphil87 Posts: 617 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.
    I love this idea man!!! Make it like lease, with a buyout option at the end...you can keep it if you want, if you feel it just doesn't suit you needs trade it back in a pick a new one ;) lol
  • farmers_daughter
    farmers_daughter Posts: 1,632 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.
    I love this idea man!!! Make it like lease, with a buyout option at the end...you can keep it if you want, if you feel it just doesn't suit you needs trade it back in a pick a new one ;) lol
    If that's the case I'm going back to school to be a therapist......I would be rollin in the dough!!!!!!

    Me: So why did you come in today?
    Client: He traded me in for a new, younger model...:sad:

    Cha-ching!!!!!!:smokin:
  • dbrightwell1270
    dbrightwell1270 Posts: 1,732 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.
    I love this idea man!!! Make it like lease, with a buyout option at the end...you can keep it if you want, if you feel it just doesn't suit you needs trade it back in a pick a new one ;) lol
    If that's the case I'm going back to school to be a therapist......I would be rollin in the dough!!!!!!

    Me: So why did you come in today?
    Client: He traded me in for a new, younger model...:sad:

    Cha-ching!!!!!!:smokin:

    why so sexist? more likely She traded me in for a luxury model.
  • farmers_daughter
    farmers_daughter Posts: 1,632 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.
    I love this idea man!!! Make it like lease, with a buyout option at the end...you can keep it if you want, if you feel it just doesn't suit you needs trade it back in a pick a new one ;) lol
    If that's the case I'm going back to school to be a therapist......I would be rollin in the dough!!!!!!

    Me: So why did you come in today?
    Client: He traded me in for a new, younger model...:sad:

    Cha-ching!!!!!!:smokin:

    why so sexist? more likely She traded me in for a luxury model.
    No no no not sexist, but that was the first thing that came to mind.... (taking a 40 year old and trading for two 20 yr olds, lol, I know I'm not the only one who's heard that joke.) :tongue:
  • bradphil87
    bradphil87 Posts: 617 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.
    I love this idea man!!! Make it like lease, with a buyout option at the end...you can keep it if you want, if you feel it just doesn't suit you needs trade it back in a pick a new one ;) lol
    If that's the case I'm going back to school to be a therapist......I would be rollin in the dough!!!!!!

    Me: So why did you come in today?
    Client: He traded me in for a new, younger model...:sad:

    Cha-ching!!!!!!:smokin:

    why so sexist? more likely She traded me in for a luxury model.
    No no no not sexist, but that was the first thing that came to mind.... (taking a 40 year old and trading for two 20 yr olds, lol, I know I'm not the only one who's heard that joke.) :tongue:
    Who knows, maybe she'll trade me in for a compact, better gas mileage sure, but no where near the power ;) lol
  • julesboots
    julesboots Posts: 311 Member
    Options
    Didn't read the article(sorry) , but the number of people here that are not interested or apathetic sort if surprises me; not sure why.

    Unfortunately, I do want to get married again (forever) and am doing nothing right now to make that happen. I realize it's just a piece of paper or even less romantically- a contract, but having been in a live in relationship that wasn't official and having been in one that was (though my marriage was just on paper-no wedding) it really felt different somehow. A lot.
  • christine24t
    christine24t Posts: 6,063 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.

    Then why even get married? Don't you get married because you want forever?

    I'd love to be one of those couples married for fifty years.

    I'd love to be married forever. I am realistic enough to provide an out if it isn't working and to recognize that people often take those closest to them for granted. By adding renewal clauses, you make it less costly to leave if you are neglected or if you grow in different directions. It also makes it less likely to take each other for granted or for people to pretend they are something they are not because there are contingencies put in place to make it less costly to leave. If anything, I'd expect this arrangement to make marriages more solid as both parties would know if they don't work on making the other happy, the marriage will end on a date certain.

    But why then 3-5 years as you stated? I agree that there should be provisions in place if they are wanted, but why put a time limit on it as you wrote?
  • dbrightwell1270
    dbrightwell1270 Posts: 1,732 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.

    Then why even get married? Don't you get married because you want forever?

    I'd love to be one of those couples married for fifty years.

    I'd love to be married forever. I am realistic enough to provide an out if it isn't working and to recognize that people often take those closest to them for granted. By adding renewal clauses, you make it less costly to leave if you are neglected or if you grow in different directions. It also makes it less likely to take each other for granted or for people to pretend they are something they are not because there are contingencies put in place to make it less costly to leave. If anything, I'd expect this arrangement to make marriages more solid as both parties would know if they don't work on making the other happy, the marriage will end on a date certain.

    But why then 3-5 years as you stated? I agree that there should be provisions in place if they are wanted, but why put a time limit on it as you wrote?

    I mentioned a renewal clause.
  • christine24t
    christine24t Posts: 6,063 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.

    Then why even get married? Don't you get married because you want forever?

    I'd love to be one of those couples married for fifty years.

    I'd love to be married forever. I am realistic enough to provide an out if it isn't working and to recognize that people often take those closest to them for granted. By adding renewal clauses, you make it less costly to leave if you are neglected or if you grow in different directions. It also makes it less likely to take each other for granted or for people to pretend they are something they are not because there are contingencies put in place to make it less costly to leave. If anything, I'd expect this arrangement to make marriages more solid as both parties would know if they don't work on making the other happy, the marriage will end on a date certain.

    But why then 3-5 years as you stated? I agree that there should be provisions in place if they are wanted, but why put a time limit on it as you wrote?

    I mentioned a renewal clause.

    Ah okay gotcha.
  • castadiva
    castadiva Posts: 2,016 Member
    Options
    Twenty years wouldn't be long enough, with the right person. Mind you, my grandparents made it to nearly sixty years, and were blissfully in love even at the end, and my parents only split after 30-odd years and are still friendly, so my models are more successful in this regard than the average.
  • MikeM53082
    MikeM53082 Posts: 1,199 Member
    Options
    I think the incentives would be better if you treated marriage like most contracts. Make it for 3 to 5 years. Have terms for the dissolution at the end of that period and provide a clause that both sides have a renewal option they can exercise. It is much less likely that either party would take the other for granted if they really valued the relationship, neither party could really feel that trapped in a bad marriage, etc.

    I love this idea!

    We would also need to get rid of alimony if the couple decides to split after 3 years.