News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by bluedevil2k on Sunday November 13, 2016 @05:14PM (#12945988)
And a wife is a net loss monetarily. I guess you shouldn't get married then
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by NumberCruncher on Sunday November 13, 2016 @05:41PM (#12946139)
You seem to get emotional. Because a guy on the internet does not want to by her GF a diamond ring? Why do you care at all?
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by joesb on Monday November 14, 2016 @12:00AM (#12947664)
Getting married is emotional.

Shouldn't get married.

Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by dllthomas on Monday November 14, 2016 @11:34PM (#12955597)
Getting married is probably something worth getting emotional about. Strangers on the internet having made different decisions (or even thinking badly about my decisions) probably isn't.
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by thecatspaw on Sunday November 13, 2016 @05:25PM (#12946053)
you can get married without a diamond ring or a expensive marriage. its only a netloss if you make it one
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by bluedevil2k on Sunday November 13, 2016 @05:28PM (#12946068)
Ok, fine then...a kid is a net loss, a particularly large one at that. Should you not have kids then?
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by chr1 on Sunday November 13, 2016 @07:12PM (#12946596)
Kid is a pretty solid long time investment(¹), which makes wife a cofounder. Good cofounder won't ask to burn some money to celebrate foundation of the company:).

(¹) of course some children are still a net loss, but other investments fail too so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by dllthomas on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @12:22PM (#12960055)
Your assertion was "if you can afford a $3k MVP you can afford a $3k ring." That the MVP shows a financial return speaks directly to affordability. The parent is not making a claim that financial return is the only thing relevant to decision making.
Re:Diamonds Suck (2006) by dllthomas on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @10:43AM (#12967903)
MBP, of course. Dang autocorrect...