salary to engagement ring spending

Why do people drive Jaguars instead of Hondas, wear Ferragamo shoes etc. etc. As much as it doesn't matter in the eternal scheme of things, money allows you to buy a different set of trinkets. Other things like buying a house, saving for your child's education, taking great vacations, donating to charity are obviously much much more important than an engagement ring and going into debt or compromising your financial security to buy it doesn't make any sense either. If you have the money and he wants you to have it similar to how he wants to drive a nicer "status" car, then I don't see what the problem is. People can make judgements about you being concerned with material things, but in a relative sense I don't think it's so bad, and it doesn't make you a bad person.

kohlberg wrote:

Flagpole Willy wrote:

7) Oh, but if a big flashy ring is important to you, then by all means do it! [sarcasm]

How's the view from that soapbox you're on? Other people have different priorities...so what? Personally, I think that you're priority of penny-pinching your whole life so you can retire a few years earlier is retarded. But it's your choice and it makes you happy. So, that's great.

Obviously xc girl doesn't have to make the same sort of financial compromises that you do, so why would you impose your value system upon her? It's beyond you giving your opinion in response to her question. You made your opinion quite clear with your first post. We get it. So why continue to trash someone elses priorities?

1) Dude, she asked me specifically, so I responded again (with EXCELLENT added material).

2) You don't get it still. She DOES have to make the same financial compromises I do -- it's all based on percentages. If she bases all of her spending decision on the amount of money they make, then she will have a hard time saving as everything is justified due to a decent amount of income (and let's not get carried away here -- under $500,000 is certainly nice income, but she's not Donald Trump, and even he needs to curb his spending. Add in the fact that they pay higher taxes than I do and he has HUGE liability insurance costs that I don't, then their money isn't all that much more than mine that they can be spending a ton. Anyway, my comment to her mostly has to do with the cost of the ring. Doesn't matter if she makes a million dollars a year. A tasteful understated ring is still the best way to go -- in MY OPINION -- an opinion she asked for and got. Waste of money to spend what she's wanting to spend. Not just my opinion either -- the majority opinion on this thread and the majority opinion in life -- bank on that. Wear too much bling and someone will stab or shoot you and take that bling.

Oh, but as long as it's important to her. Sorry brother, but not all things that are "important" to people are things that deserve to be important to them, and yes, I am one to judge, just as all other people who see her ring will do. Just telling her like it is -- I don't make the rules, but I clearly see the rules for what they are. She should spend less than $5,000 and get a nice tasteful ring that's not going to be mistaken for a doorknob.

how can you "like a diamond for what they are" when they aren't even rare? If you want to talk about "beauty" take away everyone's opinion but your own and then make a decision. Have someone take the exact same cut, style, etc. of two diamonds, one at $25k and one at some ridiculously low price and see if they can tell the difference, only then will I believe that they are choosing based on "beauty". The only reason they believe their diamond is worth $25k is because some salesperson told them that, it's like art man, can someone that knows nothing about art really decipher between what is good art and what is bad art? No, it all looks the same to them, same goes for buying rings.

I think people that drive Jaguars are wasting their money too.

But people who drive Jaguars don't post on here asking how expensive of a Jaguar their husband should buy them based on his salary.

If they did, believe me, they would be ripped worse than XC girl.

It's also not a great comparison. An expensive car at least is something that can functionally take you from point A to point B. It is also probably more dependable than a cheap car. So you are actually getting more for your money.

On the other hand, I can't think of one advantage that an expensive ring has over a cheap ring other than you could get a bit more money back selling it on E-Bay should the marriage end in divorce. There's a nice thought.

Oh, and that your sorority sisters won't rip you as bad if the ring is more expensive.

One more... wrote:

hypnotoad wrote:

I'm also not delusional when it comes to something which is basically just a legal and cultural institution.

Or spiritual.

If by spiritual you mean religious, then no. NFW!

I find "spirituality" in many things, but none of them are found inside a church or mosque or synagogue or temple or City Hall. And I require nobody's blessing to find happiness or inner peace or enlightenment or whatever it is we consider spiritual pursuits.

Flagpole Willy wrote:

2) You don't get it still. She DOES have to make the same financial compromises I do -- it's all based on percentages.

Oh, but as long as it's important to her. Sorry brother, but not all things that are "important" to people are things that deserve to be important to them, and yes, I am one to judge, just as all other people who see her ring will do. Just telling her like it is -- I don't make the rules, but I clearly see the rules for what they are. She should spend less than $5,000 and get a nice tasteful ring that's not going to be mistaken for a doorknob.

Percentages are simply reflective of prioritization. And as far as her ring is converned, what she's looking to spend on the ring is definately within the range of "normalcy" in terms of a percent spend (at least by people who are not misers like youself) based on their income.

And you're delusional if you think that people don't judge you for being a miser. There are just as many rational people out there who believe that your value system is even more pathetic than the one that you're attacking. So, I wouldn't be so quick on the judgement trigger, sport.

hypnotoad wrote:

If by spiritual you mean religious, then no. NFW!

I find "spirituality" in many things, but none of them are found inside a church or mosque or synagogue or temple or City Hall. And I require nobody's blessing to find happiness or inner peace or enlightenment or whatever it is we consider spiritual pursuits.

That is fine dude, no problems here, but that is what marriage is to me. It is more than a legal bond, it is a religious bond between me, my wife and God.

I was just adding my 2 cents. I think more people should think the way you do though, too many people think marriage is expected of them.

This thread is awesome.

One more... wrote:

It is more than a legal bond, it is a religious bond between me, my wife and God.

I don't think religious is the right word i was trying to use, I can describe what I am thinking more accurately by using the word spiritual.

Sometimes things get rough, and I have needed my faith to help me through them.

There is a big difference between religion and faith, which is why I am surprised I used the word. I think we all are guilty of associating the two together too often.

i think we would all be a little better off if we thought a little less about religion, and thought a little more about spirituality, whatever that might be for you.

this entire thread is incredibly sad. the women who have posted have generally come across as quite shallow and materialistic in a way that is ugly in my opinion. many of the men who have posted (perhaps including me now) have seemed envious and unnecessarily vindictive.

what i really blame is the diamond industry culture. the diamond industry has successfully convinced many of us that diamonds have extraordinary value and that any man who doesn't buy one (or many more) for his woman is somehow deficient. i think that leads to many men feeling defensive, as we've seen on this thread, and many women feeling like the size/quality of the diamond conveys some sort of status - wealth, amount of love, importance, or something to that effect.

my question is this: why diamonds? they're attractive enough, but there are many reasons to steer clear of them as well (historic political and social costs being the top of that list). and there are other gems/stones/precious metals that can be used in place of diamonds for the same purpose.

my favorite post on this thread is from the guy who wrote that he bought his girlfriend a nice diamond ring and then one of her friends broke the mold and did something different, which opened the door to more creative types of rings. i like the idea and i like that he wasn't afraid to say that looking back on it, what he had purchased wasn't necessarily the ideal option.

Go see the movie Blood Diamond

snowy cat wrote:

how can you "like a diamond for what they are" when they aren't even rare?

Snowy cat is correct. Diamonds are not rare, and the day of perfect crystal, man made diamonds is approaching. The 'investment' value of a diamond will be jack. If you want a rare gem, track down one of these:

snowy cat wrote:

Have someone take the exact same cut, style, etc. of two diamonds, one at $25k and one at some ridiculously low price and see if they can tell the difference, only then will I believe that they are choosing based on "beauty". The only reason they believe their diamond is worth $25k is because some salesperson told them that, it's like art man, can someone that knows nothing about art really decipher between what is good art and what is bad art? No, it all looks the same to them, same goes for buying rings.

You make no sense. If you have two diamonds with the exact cut, clarity, weight and color, then they will be very close to the same price, with exceptions being a slight mark-up by a "brand" (ie. Tiffany) retailer. It's a pretty liquid market once the diamonds get to wholesale, so you're not going to see a big price difference between retailers. So, it's not a question of paying $25k vs. a "ridiculously low price" for the same type of diamond. It's about paying $25k for a visibly superior diamond (based on cut, color, etc.) versus paying "a ridiculously low price" for something that looks ridiculously low price.

kaitainen wrote:

my favorite post on this thread is from the guy who wrote that he bought his girlfriend a nice diamond ring and then one of her friends broke the mold and did something different, which opened the door to more creative types of rings. i like the idea and i like that he wasn't afraid to say that looking back on it, what he had purchased wasn't necessarily the ideal option.

I agree, that made me happy.

the stubble of tammy thomas wrote:

snowy cat wrote:

how can you "like a diamond for what they are" when they aren't even rare?

Snowy cat is correct. Diamonds are not rare, and the day of perfect crystal, man made diamonds is approaching. The 'investment' value of a diamond will be jack. If you want a rare gem, track down one of these:

http://www.curiousnotions.com/home/gemstones.html

Anyone else notice the ad for diamond rings at the bottom of this thread? pretty funny.

If you do buy an expensive diamond ring for an investment, just how do you make your money back on it. I had a friend that was divorced and tried to sell her engagement ring and couldn't get anything for it. She ended up having it made into a charm for a necklace.

so you are telling me that if i put a $25k diamond in front of you and a $3k diamond in front of you, you would know the difference?

Haji wrote:

If you do buy an expensive diamond ring for an investment, just how do you make your money back on it.

I have worked for a number of different banks, and not a single one would take a diamond ring as collateral for anything. Why? Because too many court cases have been won by people who run out on a 10k loan and never have their ring taken b/c it cannot be repoed.

No one wants your nasty diamond, shit.

snowy cat wrote:

so you are telling me that if i put a $25k diamond in front of you and a $3k diamond in front of you, you would know the difference?

Yes. And so would you.

A different angle:

For a $30K diamond ring, you are effectively entering a contract a with your man granting him sole access to your womanly "goods and services". If he breaks the exclusivity contract with Suzy Secretary, you get the $30K ring and a nice monthly stipend. If you break the contract with the poolboy, you get the $30K ring and a nice monthyly stipend.

Doesn't take brain surgery to see who's getting screwed here...