I feel silly doubting a relationship over career prospects, but there it is

[Bad Karma]

46 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I have always interpreted the "rich man" in this scripture to not refer to a person who happens to have money, but rather a person who has set his heart upon having money and adopts a certain subset of attitudes that come with this mentality (such as the belief that the poor are somehow less worthy or righteous, and should be shunned to some degree or another).  You can be a "rich man" and not have lots of money.  Conversely, you can be "middle class" (read: righteous) and have millions, or even billions, of dollars.  It all depends on what your attitude towards money is.

I know plenty of wonderful Mormons who have good, righteous morals and a middle class mentality, complete with due humility... and happen to have, for whatever reason, been blessed with a couple of million dollars in a bank account.  One of the most righteous men I have ever met was the millionaire in my home ward, who would do anything to help someone in need, and I mean anything.  (He had seven sons, ALL of whom served missions and married in the temple!)  I have no reason to doubt that these wonderful souls will be saved in the Celestial Kingdom.

I have also unfortunately known some people who have become obsessed with money, and more to the point, with social class.  They have taken up this attitude that they are better than people who are poorer or less educated, and are constantly "sizing up" others in comparison to themselves (which is the definition of pride, according to the Church)..  What is interesting, these people with these types of attitude may not necessarily have money... I have known people who are middle to upper-middle class who still harbor these attitudes.  However, I believe that these people, who harbor these attitudes, are the rich people referred to in Matthew 19:24.  

And, while I do think that OP has a right to have some say in her husband's career decisions, I think her statement about how good Mormons should necessarily be wealthy is disturbingly close to what the Savior warned against in Matthew 19:24.  

Bottom line - you just don't want to be one of the "rich people" spoken in Matthew 19:24.  It is repulsive to God, and it is repulsive to others.  Just don't go there.

You sir, "get it"! As Peter Pan would exclaim, BANG-A-RANG!!

 

On a footnote: I don't agree that she has any say in his career decisions beyond helpful input, for this is within the dominion of a man to walk his career path as he sees fit, and each their own calling, after all, for richer or for poorer. My wife would live in a box with me. Christ himself, nor his apostles, had wealth of money or possessions. Of course, I say this after having bought a new car in November. 

Edited January 15, 2017 by Bad Karma

[NightSG]

On 1/14/2017 at 10:43 PM, DoctorLemon said:

I have also unfortunately known some people who have become obsessed with money, and more to the point, with social class.  They have taken up this attitude that they are better than people who are poorer or less educated, and are constantly "sizing up" others in comparison to themselves (which is the definition of pride, according to the Church)..  What is interesting, these people with these types of attitude may not necessarily have money... I have known people who are middle to upper-middle class who still harbor these attitudes.  However, I believe that these people, who harbor these attitudes, are the rich people referred to in Matthew 19:24.  

I've had the displeasure of dealing with some who not only are like that, but also lecture others about how we really should live like they do because it's bad for the image of the Church to have people claiming to live righteously but not displaying the earthly rewards.  Of course, these are the same people who seem to believe that HF is okay with them lying, cheating on taxes, etc. because they're sure if He wasn't He wouldn't let them prosper from it.

And then I remember that my ex wife and I actually got along quite well when we were sharing a twin bed in a 550 square foot house.

[jerrop]

On ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 9:09 AM, NightSG said:

I've had the displeasure of dealing with some who not only are like that, but also lecture others about how we really should live like they do because it's bad for the image of the Church to have people claiming to live righteously but not displaying the earthly rewards.

This drives me nuts. As if it's more important to focus on image over living right. I can see their logic but it's flawed -- a church which teaches that heavenly rewards are more valuable than earthly, with members who think the world will perceive the church as failing if they don't emphasize their earthly rewards?

NightSG - our first place was 425 square feet, but of course had everything we needed. The worst part was that the combination kitchen/dining room/living room was too small to have a full-sized dishwasher. First-world problems...

[NightSG]

21 hours ago, jerrop said:

NightSG - our first place was 425 square feet, but of course had everything we needed. The worst part was that the combination kitchen/dining room/living room was too small to have a full-sized dishwasher. First-world problems...

Been trying to get across to one of them (who's in panic mode trying to get his next house laid out and designed) that maybe some of his marital (and general stress) issues stem from not being too thankful for the roof over his head to worry about whether 3800sf is enough room for a family of four.

[Backroads]

6 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Been trying to get across to one of them (who's in panic mode trying to get his next house laid out and designed) that maybe some of his marital (and general stress) issues stem from not being too thankful for the roof over his head to worry about whether 3800sf is enough room for a family of four.

3800? Holy McMansion, Batman.

[Vort]

1 minute ago, Backroads said:

3800? Holy McMansion, Batman.

No kidding. My family of seven lived in an 1800-sf house, and we felt greatly blessed for it. Another family of nine in our ward lived in a house not much more than half the size of ours. And of course, that was still luxurious compared with much of the rest of the world, or even our own recent history. My dad's family had nine children and, after his father's death, moved to a house that was probably 900 square feet total. I think this desire (or mania) for greater ease and prosperity and palatial homes cankers people's spirits.

[anatess2]

22 minutes ago, Backroads said:

3800? Holy McMansion, Batman.

I have 2 brothers and 1 sister.  Between the 4 of us, 2 have houses bigger than 3800 sq ft.  And it's not me.  When I was in the process of purchasing a house, my mother told me this 2900 sq ft house (currently housing 6 people, 3 dogs, 4 chickens, 2 birds, 4 snakes, 2 turtles, and fish - will go up to 17 people for 6 weeks this summer) is too small.  But that said, all 4 of us paid about the same amount of money for all our houses of varying sizes.  As a matter of fact, my brother's 5000 sq ft house with 7 bedrooms and 6 bathrooms housing no less than 12 people at any point in time is cheaper than my house.

Interestingly, my first house was 1200 sq ft with 2 bedrooms and housed 2 adults, a baby, 2 dobermans, 2 cats, and a parrot and has housed 6 adults for over 6 months at one point including my mother.  My husband and I slept on a hammock in the master bedroom.  And we were just as comfortable as my house now.  It wouldn't have worked for us now though because my 2 teen-aged kids feel like there are 10 of them with the racket they and their friends make.

But yeah, like anything else, it's not the house that is important.  It is the home.  Getting a ginormous house while incurring a lot of debt will hurt the home in the same manner that a tiny house incurring a lot of debt will.

 

 

 

Edited January 18, 2017 by anatess2

[NightSG]

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

But that said, all 4 of us paid about the same amount of money for all our houses of varying sizes.  As a matter of fact, my brother's 5000 sq ft house with 7 bedrooms and 6 bathrooms housing no less than 12 people at any point in time is cheaper than my house.

Location matters a lot; when my grandparents built their 3000sf 4/3 in the 60s, they already had the land, and a pretty much ideal spot with exposed bedrock to pour the foundation on.  The biggest expense was blasting a hole for the septic tank and then hauling in several loads of dirt to have a yard.  The 1100sf 2/2 my ex and I bought in a nice neighborhood was $120k freshly updated.  

For comparison, this guy's selling a 2700sf ~$300k house and a 3800sf ~$450k house in an area where average home values are $150k-200k and moving to a cheaper area so he can build bigger.  The 2700sf was the one that was "too small" even before his first kid was born.

[Backroads]

My thing is that my house is about 2000 sq ft and I still can't keep it tidy. I would never be able to keep clean a house twice that size.

[anatess2]

45 minutes ago, Backroads said:

My thing is that my house is about 2000 sq ft and I still can't keep it tidy. I would never be able to keep clean a house twice that size.

Tell me about it!  I would never be able to keep up with this house myself!  That's the beauty of the multi-generational Filipino household.  Everybody learn to chip in to keep the house in order.  In the Philippines, they got live-in maids!

[NightSG]

On 1/18/2017 at 4:03 PM, Backroads said:

My thing is that my house is about 2000 sq ft and I still can't keep it tidy. I would never be able to keep clean a house twice that size.

Yeah; my "garage apartment" is three levels when you count the garage (dirt floor, so no need to sweep or mop at least) and the loft, (which I use mostly for storage) and I still dread cleaning days.  Even the ~500sf on the main living level is more than I care to vacuum.

[NightSG]

On 1/18/2017 at 4:00 PM, NightSG said:

For comparison, this guy's selling a 2700sf ~$300k house and a 3800sf ~$450k house in an area where average home values are $150k-200k and moving to a cheaper area so he can build bigger.  The 2700sf was the one that was "too small" even before his first kid was born.

New numbers in; what he's building is 5600sf not counting the semi-detached 4 car garage and workshop.

[eddified]

On 12/21/2016 at 10:29 PM, DoctorLemon said:

I don't know how others' marriages work, but me and my wife have equal say over every life decision.

This is a very interesting general statement. If DoctorLemon and his wife make decisions this way, I say more power to them. However, I don't know that this is generally applicable. (But, I could be wrong.)

My career is my career. I believe I should counsel with my wife but ultimately the decision is mine. My wife encourages us to have healthy boundaries, so that we can each be ourselves and be individuals, yet we work together on major issues. DoctorLemon's ideas are hard for me personally to accept though because I got married during my last semester of college (undergrad), and my wife never said anything about my choice of career. So in effect, I was never challenged about my career. So it's easy for me to say what I'm saying. 

On the other hand, my job location affects my family (do we have to move for the next job? etc). So my wife should have a say over my job. I guess I'm tentatively saying I don't think she should choose my career, by she can help choose my job? Dunno. I'm more thinking out loud than making pronouncements of opinion.