• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

How much money should I be making before I get married?

Also consider tax @MemeFan. Every dollar you "earn" through reduced expenditure (e.g. housing from a house you own, food from your own garden you don't have to buy) is tax free. Tax only applies to things that involve money. Renting a house costs you not only the direct price of the house, but you also have to earn that money, and pay tax on it - so add maybe 30% income tax on top of the rental price to get a better idea of what it actually costs. Buying other things means earning money to pay not only income tax (again let's say 30%) but also VAT (20% in much of Europe, 15% here). So you actually need to earn about 150% as much money as the thing is worth in order to buy it. Plus to earn that money you have to pay for transport to the job, clothing suitable for the job, will probably spend more money eating out when you didn't pack a lunch, childcare in some cases - all sorts of additional costs that add up enormously. Put all this together and you may find you have to earn 200% of the value of the thing or rent just in order to pay for it.

That's why all the elite advisors tell you you're better to rent. Because the elite class makes their riches off tricking you into thinking this is how you can get wealthy, and getting you really busy making money that gets bled in their direction with everything you do.

While your house would just give you a place to live without any of this additional expense.
 
MemeFan said:
So if monthly payment is 400$ and remaining balance 10000$, return is 0.04.
Click to expand...

No. Wrong.

Your monthly payment is an expense, a negative. There is no school of economics outside of Washington DC where debt service is considered some sort of bottom line benefit. It is always a cost center.

If you're paying $400 a month on $10,000 then that would probably be a personal loan with interest around 24%.

36mos x $400 = $14,123.83

So you're paying out $4,124 in interest. The bank appreciates your service, I am sure.

But in no circumstance are you ahead because of this. You would have been $4,124 ahead by saving the $10,000 for what you needed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MrB
FollowingHim said:
@MemeFan, you've bought all the propaganda behind "you'll own nothing and be happy", and don't realise you've been had.
Click to expand...
Nope, I didn't. Quting myself from this thread:

MemeFan said:
Buy a business, not a house. And nit appreciating assets, but rising real cash flow assets.
Click to expand...
I'm not against ownership. Question is ownership of what? Central message of Rich Dad, Poor Dad by Kiyosaki is to buy income producing income, not income consuming assets.

FollowingHim said:
What is income? You are only thinking in terms of something that brings money into your bank account. You are not thinking of things that stop you spending money. A house delivers a major income, in the form of providing you with somewhere to live. If you didn't own a home, you'd be paying rent. What does it cost to rent a house where you live? That is the "income" your house is providing you every single week - at least, once the mortgage is paid off.
Click to expand...
Because having house doesn't mean no having costs. Like house will mantain itself and nothing will never break. This costs are eating income.

And income is almost money in. Not having to pay isn't "income", it's cost saving.
FollowingHim said:
While you're paying the mortgage, you're paying a similar amount to renting, and then once the mortgage is paid off you don't have to spend this money any more and the house is a pure "income" source.

Sure there are costs, like taxes, but the exact same costs apply to rented properties too, and you pay them also - the landlord just charges you extra to cover those also. So the costs of a home are irrelevant, as you have to pay them regardless of if you rent or own.
Click to expand...
You have to pay regardless. Only question is what is better.
FollowingHim said:
Of course, this all makes far more sense if you stop thinking about income / expenditure in terms of money, and start thinking about it in terms of tangible things. Money is an illusion, it's just a means of exchange. I don't need money - I need shelter, food, clothing etc. Any asset that gives me shelter, food, clothing etc is valuable. Whether it directly gives me shelter (a house), or food (e.g. a garden, a cow), or whether it earns money to let me buy those things, it's still earning me value. You are ignoring everything where that value does not come in the form of money.
Click to expand...
Money is real, just like love, honor, pride, bravery. None are tangible and something you can touch. But they still exist.

I'm not ignoring love and happiness, just topic is housing.

FollowingHim said:
This is how the powers that be want you to think, because they do not want you to have real wealth that you control, only fake money that they control.
Click to expand...
I haven't fallencfor their pschops. Instead I have to explain because nobody else has bothered to learn freely available course how big business work. I already told you, I'm not preaching something unknown. Nope, just basics of corporate finance (taught in any MBA school)

FollowingHim said:
Also consider tax @MemeFan. Every dollar you "earn" through reduced expenditure (e.g. housing from a house you own, food from your own garden you don't have to buy) is tax free. Tax only applies to things that involve money. Renting a house costs you not only the direct price of the house, but you also have to earn that money, and pay tax on it - so add maybe 30% income tax on top of the rental price to get a better idea of what it actually costs. Buying other things means earning money to pay not only income tax (again let's say 30%) but also VAT (20% in much of Europe, 15% here). So you actually need to earn about 150% as much money as the thing is worth in order to buy it. Plus to earn that money you have to pay for transport to the job, clothing suitable for the job, will probably spend more money eating out when you didn't pack a lunch, childcare in some cases - all sorts of additional costs that add up enormously. Put all this together and you may find you have to earn 200% of the value of the thing or rent just in order to pay for it.
Click to expand...
Look, this tax story is story about double/triple/quadruple etc taxation. Evil.

And don't hsve to involve money. Tax can be in nature, 500 kg of sheep meat.

And taxes can be on things you own. Here, intro to tax types:

taxfoundation.org

The Three Basic Tax Types

Discover the three basic tax types—taxes on what you earn, taxes on what you buy, and taxes on what you own. Learn more.
taxfoundation.org taxfoundation.org

FollowingHim said:
That's why all the elite advisors tell you you're better to rent. Because the elite class makes their riches off tricking you into thinking this is how you can get wealthy, and getting you really busy making money that gets bled in their direction with everything you do.

While your house would just give you a place to live without any of this additional expense.
Click to expand...
Nope, ruling class is teaching you your "common wisdom" in order for you to help them get rich. Have you ever asked yourself why bankster allow you to do accelerated debt payment?

Because more you pay $, the more $ they have to lend. And if reserve ratio is 1:10, if you pay 100$ to bank, bank can now lend 1000$ earning sweet interest.

And if you truly wants to screw banksters, learn concept of infinite banking.
 
MeganC said:
No. Wrong.

Your monthly payment is an expense, a negative. There is no school of economics outside of Washington DC where debt service is considered some sort of bottom line benefit. It is always a cost center.

If you're paying $400 a month on $10,000 then that would probably be a personal loan with interest around 24%.

36mos x $400 = $14,123.83

So you're paying out $4,124 in interest. The bank appreciates your service, I am sure.

But in no circumstance are you ahead because of this. You would have been $4,124 ahead by saving the $10,000 for what you needed.
Click to expand...
Off course, it's expense. Horewer it's expense for which Uncle Sam reduces your monetary obligation to him. Do you understand how tax deductions works?

If your tax basis (money which is be taxed) is 10000 and your interest to be payed to bank is 2000, you can lower your tax basis to 8000. So if tax rate is 20%, you have saved in taxes 2000×0.2=400$. Only question is interest expense worth tax saving?

Real question is it worth it? And sadly for you, even interest rate of 40% can be worth. How does Walmart and any retailer makes money? Margins can't be, they are too low. Trick is to speed up inventory turnover.

Borrow 1000$ at bank, buy inventory, sell inventory at 4% markup, buy inventory, sell inventory at 4%, buy inventory, sell inventory and 4% markup.... if you are fast enough, you can earn even 50/60/70% on banks 1000$, so you are still ahead.
 
@MemeFan, I was going to say it sounded like you've been reading Robert Kiyosaki. There is truth in what he says, but it is risky truth, and not the whole truth. It works when times are good and business is growing, but will leave you overleveraged and bankrupt if the economy collapses. Learn from more perspectives than just that one.
 
FollowingHim said:
@MemeFan, I was going to say it sounded like you've been reading Robert Kiyosaki. There is truth in what he says, but it is risky truth, and not the whole truth. It works when times are good and business is growing, but will leave you overleveraged and bankrupt if the economy collapses. Learn from more perspectives than just that one.
Click to expand...
Careful, Kiyosaki was a major influence on @andrew ’s concept of “scalable marriage”. You don’t need ant to commit heresy….
 
FollowingHim said:
@MemeFan, I was going to say it sounded like you've been reading Robert Kiyosaki. There is truth in what he says, but it is risky truth, and not the whole truth. It works when times are good and business is growing, but will leave you overleveraged and bankrupt if the economy collapses. Learn from more perspectives than just that one.
Click to expand...
Nobody is talking about let's be in debt as much as possible.
 
Aaron_D said:
I am 26 years old and single. I know that having a family is expensive and I want to be financially responsible and not get married and have children before I can afford to. Right now I have a steady job and I make enough money to pay for the things that I need and to save a little bit. I could not buy a house or support a wife and children with my current income, and I think that it is unlikely that the income from my job will increase in the near future. I am looking into starting some kind of side business to increase my income, but I know that the outcome of that is uncertain. I am also concerned that mass inflation will continue and that I will be poorer in the future than I am now because of it.

So the advice I am looking for is how long I should wait to start seriously looking for a wife. I want to make sure that what I do is in line with scripture and that I will be able to fulfill all of my responsibilities to my family. The scripture that I found about being a provider is exodus 21:10-11 and 1 timothy 5:8 but other than that I am not sure what my financial obligations are to my wife according to the bible.

Do you think that I would be meeting my obligations to provide food, clothing, and shelter to my wife if her income to is required to help pay the bills?

I know that if I had several wives instead of one we could all pool our income together and better afford things. I am just not sure if it would be a good idea to pursue plural marriage for financial reasons.
Click to expand...
Greetings Aaron,
Just to let you know I have not read all the replies, so someone could have already touched this, but I don't know, I am still going to give you my 2 cents. The replies that I have read are ok/good advice when it comes to renting vs. owning right off the bat and making sure your ducks are all in a row, that part is good. When my wife and I got married we weren't even close to living Biblical, 2 months later YaHWeH took care of that part, but let's talk about the first 2 months. 1) I had a job as a welder building railroad cars, was it enough to support a family? I don't know, all I know is I am now married and I have to be responsible. 2) This is where I say the one advice is ok advice. I might get some flack but that is ok. If you look at it from a Biblical standpoint you have the 3 categories of people in the Bible. Rich, middle class, and poor, and guess what, those same 3 categories still exist today. I would say we definitely started out in the poor category, buying a house and property was not on the table. We lived in apartments for 8 years, then in 2000 I made a career change and became a Union Boilermaker, we gave up apartment living and moved into a 35' travel trailer, and took my wife and 4 children, our dalmatian and cat on the road with me all over the country for work (we homeschooled) for the first 3 years of my career. By the way, we did all of this on one income, except for about 4 months to help pay off the trailer super quick, my wife worked part-time in the evening after I got home.

In 2003 we bought a house on 33 acres, in the middle of nowhere Missouri, mind you this is all still on one income. Since we bought the house, the wife and children stayed home and I went out and earned the money. After 16 years in the trade, I got tired of traveling and being away from my wife and children. Put the house up for sale, it wasn't selling, and quit paying the mortgage, mortgage people offered me $3000 to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure, I took it and used it as a down payment for 20 acres of just land. So I took a major pay cut, closed out my annuity, and used my annuity to build stuff on the property 100% debt-free. We now live in a tiny home and we are empty nesters.

I say all the above, about being on one income to say this... If your wife gets sick or has children and can't work for any length of time you can still pay all the bills and not struggle. I am not opposed to more than one income, (Proverbs 31) just staying within the means as if only one income. I would like to point out that my wife does work now, she came to me one day and asked me if it was ok for her to get a job since all the children were gone. I asked her why. She informed me, that she is bored and she can only clean the house so many times a day and she needed something to do and people to be around because all her people were gone. I told her Yes.

If you find yourself a woman, who loves simplicity, the way we started will work out fine, in my opinion. If she is all about the comforts of the world then I would wait. I hope this all makes sense.
 
What is great about @Edward's advice is that it is practical and realistic, and informed by experience. There is a lot of hypothetical / theoretical discussion above @Aaron_D, and that is interesting and can be informative, but pay most attention to the advice that is the fruit of personal experience.

Anyway, you keep coming back every day but aren't commenting, so I presume you're reading this. It's amusing and a bit silly how we're able to keep a conversation going without the actual person who asked the question saying a word! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top