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?
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
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
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 .
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.
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!
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.
I'll shoot you straight and keep this short and sweet. I would choose being super wealthy and never experiencing or finding love.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Being The Frog Prince this was too easy. Poor and eternal.
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!
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
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
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..
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.
by Elena22 months ago
What is the difference between "I Love You" and "I am in Love with You?"Do they mean different things to you? Do you use them in different ways?
by Bredavies5 years ago
Would you choose love or money?Last time I made this question it was removed because it was not explained very well. It is basically a simple argument about love vs status and power and I would love to know what some...
by Sophia Angelique2 years ago
According to Malcolm Gladwell in his book, Outliers, the answer is no.Gladwell showed repeatedly that whether people who succeeded or not, depended a great deal on how much wealth and education their parents had. For...
by Faith Reaper2 years ago
When you realized you were in love, true love, how did it come about or how did you know for sure?Was it love at first sight? Was it slowly realized over time through a friendship that developed into love? ...
by Billy Hicks5 years ago
There has been a lot of discussion about class warfare, and the wealthy not paying "their fair share",so my question for you, my esteemed fellow Hubbers is this:Assuming that they are complying with all...
by Texasbeta6 years ago
I hate to just post a link and walk away, but I cannot imagine it being put more clearly.http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne … h-20111109
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.