If you're Belinda Stronach or Tie Domi, who allegedly are in the midst of a steamy love affair, and who both most definitely have buckets of cash -- it may not be an issue.
But it's a burning question for the unattached, who lust for a relationship, and perhaps the comfort of two paycheques.
So, are you better off single? Or married?
"Conventional wisdom says you're better off married," says Bev Moir, senior investment advisor at ScotiaMcLeod. "Two incomes are better than one."
One of Bay Street's eligible bachelors -- who at 28 recently broke up with his girlfriend of three years and admits he's "heartbroken" -- agrees.
"Being married has its financial rewards," said this financial services communications specialist. "And one of them is with two incomes, you can afford to buy a home. On my own, I can barely afford a condo."
But, he adds: "It's a big city, and there's a lot of variety out there. It's tough to commit."
Needless to say, Domi found out the hard way: The temptation of lots of variety led to the demise of his marriage. And divorce will cost this retired hockey legend, who's carrying a $3.75 million mortgage on the matrimonial mansion.
But whether it's better to be single or married -- it really comes down to the person.
For example, a single person may be miserable, sitting there all alone and believing love will never come. But, being alone provides opportunity to be financially independent, even rich.
"When you're single, you have to be self-reliant and financially responsible," says Moir. "You also are more apt to develop a career to support yourself."
The magic here is a single person has total control -- no spouse blowing the line of credit, credit cards, and possibly the credit rating.
But a single person could blow a wad chasing love.
Singles should also think about this: Some couples are only staying together because of money. Divorce just costs too much. So, they may look like they're living the high life and keeping up with the Joneses -- but in the bedroom, it's still very lonely.
Then, there's this: It starts when you sink into his arms, and ends with your arms in the sink. Even if you're working.
Fact is the feminist movement gave birth to women seeking careers in the workplace, and then with restructuring and re-engineering, these women watched in horror as their spouses lost a job. Yet, many complain they're still the maid in the home, even though they're also the key breadwinner.
Sex? Are you kidding -- there's no time.
According to a Statistics Canada study, there's been a dramatic rise in the number of wives who are the primary breadwinners. In 1967, an estimated 11% of wives earned more than their husbands did. By 2003, this proportion nearly tripled to 29%.
Yet, their earning power is less. For example, wives who were primary breadwinners earned $41,200 in 2003, well below the earning power of their male counterparts, at $57,900.
Take it to the professional level and it's the same. Primary-earner wives in management positions earned an average of $68,000 a year, compared to males at $83,000.
Meanwhile, the national average income for families where both the husband and wife work was $83,100 in 2004. And for lone-parent families, it was $29,500.
Now, here's what else singles should think about. The high cost of children. It's estimated a family earning $41,700 to $70,200 will spend $270,000 raising a child.
Add in the high cost of university, estimated to be $14,000 a year, and is it any wonder parents are borrowing against home equity.
|