Vetting your sweetheart

January 27, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With Valentine’s Day just around the corner, a Purdue University expert recommends the marriage-minded conduct some pragmatic due diligence before engagement rings find their way onto fingers.

It’s widely known that financial problems undermine many a marriage. To that end, Sharon Burns, an associate professor of consumer sciences and retailing, suggests looking for bad habits before they wreak havoc. Not easy to do during such a passionate time, maybe, but still wise. Here they are:

--Your sweetheart has borrowed lots of money from you once or has borrowed from you more than once. This can signal they’re living above their means or managing money poorly.

--He or she buys lots of the latest clothes, gadgets, cars and other luxuries. Big spending can reveal their needing a crutch to make them feel better and, ultimately, personal insecurity or lack of discipline.

--Your love needs financial help from family or friends. “Mature adults support themselves,” Burns says.

--They pay for normal living expenses with credit cards and then don’t pay the bill in full at the end of the month, a “sure sign of disaster ahead."

--They can’t hold down a job. In a normal economy, you should wonder if they’re lazy or lack self discipline.

Love is great, Burns says; blind love isn’t.

What are your thoughts on her advice? Anything you wish you’d known before tying the knot?

 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Do your Due Diligence
    Conducting due diligence on your mate is similar to the due diligence you should do on hiring employees. The more you know and understand about the person, the better your decision will be!

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. How much you wanna bet, that 70% of the jobs created there (after construction) are minimum wage? And Harvey is correct, the vast majority of residents in this project will drive to their jobs, and to think otherwise, is like Harvey says, a pipe dream. Someone working at a restaurant or retail store will not be able to afford living there. What ever happened to people who wanted to build buildings, paying for it themselves? Not a fan of these tax deals.

  2. Uh, no GeorgeP. The project is supposed to bring on 1,000 jobs and those people along with the people that will be living in the new residential will be driving to their jobs. The walkable stuff is a pipe dream. Besides, walkable is defined as having all daily necessities within 1/2 mile. That's not the case here. Never will be.

  3. Brad is on to something there. The merger of the Formula E and IndyCar Series would give IndyCar access to International markets and Formula E access the Indianapolis 500, not to mention some other events in the USA. Maybe after 2016 but before the new Dallara is rolled out for 2018. This give IndyCar two more seasons to run the DW12 and Formula E to get charged up, pun intended. Then shock the racing world, pun intended, but making the 101st Indianapolis 500 a stellar, groundbreaking event: The first all-electric Indy 500, and use that platform to promote the future of the sport.

  4. No, HarveyF, the exact opposite. Greater density and closeness to retail and everyday necessities reduces traffic. When one has to drive miles for necessities, all those cars are on the roads for many miles. When reasonable density is built, low rise in this case, in the middle of a thriving retail area, one has to drive far less, actually reducing the number of cars on the road.

  5. The Indy Star announced today the appointment of a new Beverage Reporter! So instead of insightful reports on Indy pro sports and Indiana college teams, you now get to read stories about the 432nd new brewery open or some obscure Hoosier winery winning a county fair blue ribbon. Yep, that's the coverage we Star readers crave. Not.

ADVERTISEMENT