When poverty comes in at the door, "love" flies out at the window. What means "love" ?
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Verified answer
Then that's not true love! Have you seen the movie "the persuit of happiness" with Will Smith?---> that movie is the perfect example of what you're asking. Personally, I admire my parents SO MUCH. My family was going through a tough time, we were SO poor, but my parents knew they would get through it together! Their love got stronger because of this poverty and that is really rare. Even when my dad had to move away for a year to make us money, they fell back in love with each other because they saw how each other struggled. I admire it so much. For men, it might be guilt that they are the primary bread winners and can't provide for his family. Love means staying together "for ritcher AND for POORER" I don't understand how people can leave their loved one because of money. I guess it's equally as stupid when people "fall in love" because of lots of money that the other person has. Either way, people will always be F'd up, but hopefully true people, who love each other enough will have it in them to keep it together like my parents did! Because, there is a LOT of stress to deal with that they might want to take out on each other, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
The term "love" has more than one meaning. In this particular context the meaning is closer to infatuation than that of enduring emotional attachment. Many homes, and families, have been built upon brief social and physical infatuation with another, e.g., dating and marrying the most popular or most attractive person, dating and marrying someone of a particular status or occupation, or because of unexpected family responsibilities. In any of these situations the probability for disaster is high. If a relationship is premised upon anything short of mutual understanding and respect, then, at the first instance of trouble (especially financial trouble) those elements once thought as providing the spine of the relationship become untenable. Especially if one or the other of the couple has their identity closely tied to class signifiers, i.e., attributes available only through the obtainment and display of personal wealth.
Love may be defined as the attainment of understanding of yourself through, and of, another. Reciprocally.
I married a poor man and dated several others in similar financial conditions. I was never spoilt materially by a man...in fact, I spoilt them! Unfortunately for me, none of these men respected my trust, loving nature, and altruistic proclivities. I was abused and mistreated. Poverty would have meant NOTHING if only I had received love, consideration, kindness, and RESPECT. I would love to meet a wealthy man with these attributes in order to relax a bit after 43 years of having to rely on myself, however if I could see into a crystal ball that I would get my beautifully kind, loving man, but that he was poor, I would welcome him with open arms. Wealth is great as it gives you freedom to choose, but love is nourishment for the soul.
Poverty can change a man, he can get 'intoxicated' by thoughts of wealth and be led by these in life. he can lose his path choosing money instead of love.
But if you can keep your values you'll see that love is everything... love can bring you so much power, love can make you conquer everything, love can move mountains...only love
with none connection with "what the books actual ARE", there is not sufficient concepts to "rewrite" the sentence because of the lack of ability of concepts approximately "the books". In English "the books" could have a sort of meanings: ought to propose countless literary works (as interior the "e book" 'The Da Vinci Code') "the books" can propose additionally in English "accounting ledgers"............ They way that the sentence is written now, it sounds to ME (as this could be a private interpretation) "The books have been given left at the back of" ability to ME: "The books that have been meant to be taken [with one] have been forgotten [to be taken] by utilising the guy in question." yet another finished occasion of the re-worked sentence could be: because of the undeniable fact that we've been in a hurry to depart for the airport, the books that we would have liked for the trip have been given left at the back of. i desire this enables............ Christopher ok.
Its like when you become poor, you have no money love of dear n near ones fades away, or vanishes. This is coz most people are with us just for money, if we dun have money no one will be there with us, we are left alone!
nice question !
i really admire that
well a true love always persist in our heart.
we never forgets but conditions never permit to show or tensions take over
but a true love always b there
this can be interpreted different ways by different people. but to me it says that when the money goes, or when there is significant financial stress, that is when the love no longer matters, relationships breakdown and love just.... vanishes
for richer or for poorer that was the promise if it was true love to begin with. If not you learned your love lesson for the day.
In that sentence "love" should be replaced with "the gold digger".