# ‘Marriage gap’ exists between rich and poor Canadians, new study shows



## realist (Apr 8, 2011)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...or-canadians-new-study-shows/article17091114/

"A new study released today by the Ottawa-based Institute of Marriage and Family has crunched the Canadian numbers using Statistics Canada data, and found a pattern similar to the United States. The marriage gap has widened by income. In Canada, couples in the highest income bracket are the most likely to be married, or living common-law – and have pretty much the same marriage rates as their counterparts in 1976. "

There are a bunch of articles talking about this today. Am I the only one who thinks "Duh!" ? Isn't this essentially like saying "People who share living expenses come out ahead!" Obviously paying for the wedding itself, wedding rings etc is expensive, and children is a whole other issue, but cutting most of my bills in half adds up over the long term. 

Thoughts?


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

realist said:


> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...or-canadians-new-study-shows/article17091114/
> 
> "A new study released today by the Ottawa-based Institute of Marriage and Family has crunched the Canadian numbers using Statistics Canada data, and found a pattern similar to the United States. The marriage gap has widened by income. In Canada, couples in the highest income bracket are the most likely to be married, or living common-law – and have pretty much the same marriage rates as their counterparts in 1976. "
> 
> ...


Not really. You are talking about wealth or net worth. They are talking about income. The article is saying that the doctors, dentists, engineers, business owners, ceo's in the 1% of INCOME every year are more likely to be married. Maybe you can say it's the rich dudes attracting the young ladies who want to marry up. Or in nicer terms, those that are good 'catches' are more likely to get locked up long term. Or it could be implying that you're more likely to get a higher paying job just due to being married.

If it said that those with high net worth are more likely to be married, then that makes more sense for the reasons you mentioned.


----------



## Jon_Snow (May 20, 2009)

My wife and I have been living on one salary, banking the other for 12 years... uh,yeah, you tend to get ahead financially doing this.

Yet another study in which common sense could have easily predicted the outcome.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

No surprises on this here either.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

I found it not at all clear what income they are measuring, but I think it is "family income', whether it is a married couple; a common law couple; a single person with children, or a single person with no children. In which case it is "Duh". They're comparing combined income of couples with the income of singles; and for various sociological reasons the percentage of singles, with or without children, has increased.


----------



## Siwash (Sep 1, 2013)

I think this goes deeper than just finances…

You should read "Coming Apart" by Charles Murray if you are interested.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

So, does that mean we don't need income splitting to help out the married couples after all? Maybe we need something for those poor disadvantaged single people. :tongue-new:


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

Income splitting was never intended to solve the problem of poor single people. It is/was intended to eliminate the injustice of two couples with the same family income having a different tax burden because one couple has two income-earners and the other has only one. It is about fairness, not resolving the problems of the poor.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

High income earners are more likely to "have it together" and therefore more likely to be marriageable. Additionally, high income people are more likely to come from high income parents, who are more likely to be married. Children who grow up with married parents are more likely to get married themselves.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

With the divorce rate at about 4 in 10 in canada on first marriages and a substantial increase in divorce rates in 2nd marriages i wonder what the rates are in the higher income bracket.
Since women mostly file i always thought the workaholic(business comes first)unfilled house wife would be higher(most of the rich have a stay at home parent,that is fact,the 2 income family is mostly middle class)
I would of thought being ''trapped'' in marriage is more likely in lower income couples because it is harder to leave and the working poor value relationships more.


----------



## Taraz (Nov 24, 2013)

Even if married people do earn more per capita, it's most likely correlation, not causation.


----------

