If you had one choice ONLY - Be poor and have Love -...or be wealthy and never e

1. 80

   Ranziposted 12 years ago

   If you had one choice ONLY - Be poor and have Love -...or be wealthy and never experience love
   
   If you had to choose between being really poor and finding eternal true love - or been super wealthy and never finding love or even experiencing lit. What would you choose?

   replyreport
2. 60

   Myriadposted 12 years ago

   Real love is always more painful, Come on , life is about having money. No one really loves another without conditions. The question is what s in it for me. But when you find love , and if you do find love ..whatever it is . It is absolutely worth giving up everything else if life for. SO till I have love , I rather stick with money

   replyreport
   1. 62

      cat on a soapboxposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Financial security is one of the things that others often look for when selecting a mate, along w/ good character, mutual love,  similar interests, respect, & more. Real love doesn't usually bail in downtimes, but any good relationship takes effo

      replyreport
3. 61

   freecampingaussieposted 12 years ago

   A similar question to this was asked very recently and most of us that answered would prefer to have true love as life without love would be meaninless .

   replyreport
4. 80

   Ranziposted 12 years ago

   The reason I'm asking this question on here is because I asked this same question on an elite site full of rich people and socialites and not one of them gave me a straight answer. It was a though they couldn't imagine a life without money, and I guess many of them bought  love with their status and wealth.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      SidKempposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Can true love be bought?

      replyreport
   2. 84

      quicksandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Sure you can buy love with money. That kind of love can also mature into genuine love as time goes on. Even if it does not, it would not matter because if you are wealthy you will be kept busy all the time and putting love to the acid test ... oops!

      replyreport
5. 72

   lburmasterposted 12 years ago

   Be poor and have love. I've seen too many hollow people who envy happy couples. Yet their belongings never give them the same happiness, adoration, devotion, etc.

   replyreport
6. 80

   Express10posted 12 years ago

   I'll shoot you straight and keep this short and sweet. I would choose being super wealthy and never experiencing or finding love.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      quicksandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      iOle!

      replyreport
7. 0

   Motown2Chitownposted 12 years ago

   I've seen this question a million times, and I'm always amazed at the number of people who choose money.  I personally would rather live in a cave and eat dirt with people who truly love me than have all the wealth in the world.  Only those who have never experienced true love among their family, friends, and significant others would choose money, in my opinion.

   replyreport
   1. 40

      ChristinSposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I completely agree.

      replyreport
8. 74

   SidKempposted 12 years ago

   I would choose eternal true love - and that doesn't mean I would need to have a romantic partner, or even a friend. The truest love is to love all, in every way, unconditionally. When we do that, our conditions do not matter. Wealth and poverty - I've experienced both - don't matter. Even the love of other people doesn't matter so much. The joy of loving is the truest eternal love. One minute of that is worth all life's privations.
   
   At least, that's my experience.

   replyreport
9. 62

   cat on a soapboxposted 12 years ago

   In my mind there will never be a substitute for genuine love and true companionship. I have faith that God will provide the circumstances for me to find what I need in my life.

   replyreport
10. 64

    snapbackbettyposted 12 years ago

    I'd rather be poor and have love. Money can't buy true happiness... No matter how much you spend it may not really ever make you happy.

    replyreport
11. 69

    The Frog Princeposted 12 years ago

    Being The Frog Prince this was too easy.  Poor and eternal. 
    
    TFP

    replyreport
12. 84

    quicksandposted 12 years ago

    Well, if you are poor and are loved, you will not notice the absence of wealth. If you have an abundance of wealth, you won't notice love, whether it is present or absent! Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

    replyreport
13. 64

    Lisa HWposted 12 years ago

    If by "love" you mean "general love" (rather than romantic love), I'd choose the general love (like having a family one loves).  If you mean romantic love - I want the money.  "Eternal true love" is something a whole lot of people manage quite nicely without.  Besides, people don't miss what they've never had.  Money can buy a lot more happiness than a lot of people want to admit it can.   lol

    replyreport
    1. 61

       freecampingaussieposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I believe to a degree money can help of course  but I would want someone I love to enjoy it with or it would be a lonely life . At the moment I am married to a man I love so would prefer less money & be with him than on my own with lots of money

       replyreport
    2. 64

       Lisa HWposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       My answer was based on pretending we don't have whatever we may already now, or even have had at one time (whether money or a honey    )  I don't think too many people would want to throw over love they already have in favor of money and no love..

       replyreport
14. 71

    connorjposted 12 years ago

    They "key" here is two words of significance in the question,  "eternal (true) love." Therefore, since associated with eternal (true) love is the state of poverty one must conclude that in reality the richest would paradoxically be the poorest... There is nothing as rich as eternal love even when associated with anything of this world including paradoxically significant wealthyness.

    replyreport