Why are rich American men not polygamous?

[EnchantedLife]

Why are rich American men not polygamous? I suspect that the divorce laws would make polygamy financially too risky for the rich. About one percent of men in first world countries are rich enough to live on investment income, and if one in ten of these rich men are suitable as responsible polygamous husbands, then we have a potential of one man in a thousand to be polygamous. In the United States, that translates to a potential of 150,000 polygamous households living largely or entirely from investment income.

Men who do not have independent incomes can also be good polygamous husbands, of course, but men with independent incomes are well placed to be polygamous, because they do not need a job to get an income. Men with independent incomes are well placed to be a political force in promoting polygamy.

In all first world societies, we would expect a potential of half a million polygamous households, where the men have independent incomes. Once India and China move up to first world level in the future, that number could triple.

 

[ylop]

I have wondered along similar lines, and the answers I come up with are:
. Fear of gold diggers
. Fear of loss of wealth from divorce settlements
. Fear of loss of public status
. No need to be polygamous when you can have as many mistresses as you want
. No desire to have additional children
. Serial monagamy - continually trade in the old model - quite socially acceptable

ylop

 

[Scarecrow]

". Fear of gold diggers
. Fear of loss of wealth from divorce settlements
. Fear of loss of public status
. No need to be polygamous when you can have as many mistresses as you want
. No desire to have additional children
. Serial monogamy - continually trade in the old model - quite socially acceptable"

Ah yes.....how I miss the good old days of Rome... ; ) I think we fail to realize just how little mankind has changed over the centuries...same sins...same stuff...different millennia...

 

[JRNorth]

I am of the same opinion. As long as they can trade women back and forth under the pretense of morality, they probably will not take too much interest in responsible plural marriage.

Of course if they took multiple wives and children, they wouldn't be rich for long. :lol:

 

[welltan]

They, being rich with investment/business matters probably have a private secretary. Also they may look after their own valuable health with a personal trainer, etc. But probably the serial monogamy (one lady after another) is the usual sad solution taken.

 

[EnchantedLife]

A rich man engaging in serial monogamy could be hit hard financially by large divorce settlements. Polygamy is not necessarily more expensive than monogamy when you consider divorce settlements.

Polygamy is more realistic now for a growing number of men because of rising prosperity in rich countries over the last hundred years. I believe polygamy is a sleeping political issue, and one day rich men will suddenly realise that polygamy is a realistic possibility, given alterations to divorce laws. If many rich men are polygamous, a woman who leaves one polygamous household can join any other polygamous household. She does not need to look for a rich man who is unattached.

I considered just those men who have independent incomes, becuase they do not rely on an employer for income.

 

[Anonymous]

EnchantedLife said,
If many rich men are polygamous, a woman who leaves one polygamous household can join any other polygamous household. She does not need to look for a rich man who is unattached.

You do realize that this forum is called "Biblical Families, don't you? It is rarely considered Biblical for wives to switch families, regardless of financial status. The most likely possibility is if the woman is widowed but I didn't see that referenced in your formula. Marriage is by definition, for life.

 

[sweetlissa]

Thank you John

SweetLiissa

 

[EnchantedLife]

Resistance Level

There is a phenomenon on the stock market known as a resistance level. If a company is doing well, and is expected to go on doing well, the stock price will rise, but sometimes sticks at a certain price. The stock price can drift at this level for weeks, or months, before it rises strongly, and is said to break out of the resistance level.

I think there is a similar phenomenon with regard to polygamy. There is no logical reason for rich men not to be polygamous, but there is strong resistance to the idea. As first world countries become more prosperous, we can expect a break out in polygamy, and a large increase in polygamous households, whether religious or not.

Once polygamy is accepted, people will wonder why they did not think of it earlier.

Give it twenty years.

 

[EnchantedLife]

EnchantedLife said,
If many rich men are polygamous, a woman who leaves one polygamous household can join any other polygamous household. She does not need to look for a rich man who is unattached.

John Whitten said:
You do realize that this forum is called "Biblical Families, don't you? It is rarely considered Biblical for wives to switch families, regardless of financial status. The most likely possibility is if the woman is widowed but I didn't see that referenced in your formula. Marriage is by definition, for life


Point taken, John. I expressed myself carelessly. Any wife knows that there is a risk of losing her husband, through illness or accident. A low risk, but there nonetheless. In secular society, marriage breakdown and divorce is an important cause of a wife losing her husband. The important point is that any wife, even in a strongly Christian community, has to face the fact that she can lose her husband.

A monogamous husband usually carries life insurance to allow the wife some support in the event of his death, from whatever cause. A polygamous husband has a much greater financial responsibility, in the event of his death.

My point was that if polygamy becomes widespread in secular society, then a wife who loses her husband, from whatever cause, including marriage breakdown, can join almost any other household, even if the man already has a wife. She does not need to confine herself to the pool of single men.