1 in 4 Are Staying In Relationships Because They Can't Afford To Be Single
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Nearly one in four Americans in relationships are remaining with their partners primarily due to financial constraints, according to a new national survey.
The data highlights a growing link between economic pressure and personal decision-making in modern relationships.
Why It Matters
The study from Self Financial underscores how deeply money impacts romantic choices. It suggests that economic pressures not only shape when and whom people marry but also whether they remain in relationships that no longer serve them emotionally or psychologically.
The findings come amid rising living costs across the United States, which can make single living or separation prohibitively expensive. For many, shared rent, utilities, and other joint expenses are the only way to maintain financial stability.
Spring training baseball game between Oakland Athletics and Seattle Mariners at Phoenix Municipal Stadium in Phoenix, Arizona.
Spring training baseball game between Oakland Athletics and Seattle Mariners at Phoenix Municipal Stadium in Phoenix, Arizona.
Jim Sugar/Corbis via Getty Images
What To Know
The survey from Self Financial, which polled over 1,048 U.S. residents, found that roughly 24 percent of people currently in a relationship said they would leave if they could do so without suffering a financial loss.
"If the situation were truly unbearable, most people could adjust their lifestyle. They'd downsize, simplify, and make it work. However, many stay because it feels safer to endure a bad relationship than to risk being untethered from their tribe," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek.
The survey also found that an overwhelming number of respondents, 86.6 percent, said that they've had a conflict with their partner over finances. Those conflicts caused breakups in some instances. 41.4 percent of respondents said that money was a factor in a past breakup, including 18.6 percent who initiated the breakup and 22.8 percent who cited it as a "contributing factor."
This dynamic is reflected in broader social trends.
Research from Cornell University earlier this year found that couples facing high financial stress are more likely to avoid meaningful conversations about their problems.
According to the study, this stress "not only creates conflict but also depletes cognitive resources, making it harder for individuals to engage in constructive conversations with their partners."
What People Are Saying
Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "People often say they 'can't afford' to leave a relationship, but that's not the root issue. The real reason is fear. We're tribal by nature, social creatures who crave connection, and we'll latch onto any justification, even financial, to avoid being alone. Saying, 'I can't leave because of money,' is easier than admitting, 'I'm afraid of what's next.'"
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "While no one likes the idea of having to stay with a partner for financial reasons, for some this may be the only way to financially keep their head above water. Whether it's sharing the rent, utility bills, groceries, or any other expenses, couples are increasingly having to lean on each other financially to manage the cost of living. We've seen in the past how times of recession decrease divorce rates, as the cost involved isn't feasible for many who have lost a job or had their income take a hit."
What Happens Next
As financial pressures grow due to inflation, rising housing costs, and economic uncertainty, experts suggest more couples may delay separation, not out of emotional attachment but for the sake of financial survival.
"While that may seem like a smart move at the moment, the longer the separation can be kicked down the road, it can actually produce bigger, more complicated financial issues, as the economic outlook of both individuals gets more intertwined," Beene said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's FTC is digging into Elon Musk's claims about an advertiser ‘boycott'
Happy Tuesday! Here's your weekly Tech Drop, a roundup of the past week's top stories from the intersection of technology and politics. Elon Musk's ostensible departure from the White House and its contentious aftermath certainly haven't stopped the Trump administration from working to further Musk's commercial interests. The Federal Trade Commission recently demanded documents from some of the world's largest ad agencies, following on from Musk's allegations that companies have been engaged in a 'boycott' when they chose not to purchase ads on X due to the prevalence of disinformation and hate speech on the platform. (Several major corporations recently asked a judge to dismiss a related lawsuit brought by X.) Read more at The Wall Street Journal. Meta is making a foray into military technology, starting with plans to develop a virtual reality–enabled headset to train U.S. troops. I laid out some glaring security concerns in a recent post that highlights the company's history of being used by illiberal forces to spread disinformation and promote propaganda linked to violence. Read more at MSNBC. Amid protests in Los Angeles over the Trump administration's authoritarian, anti-immigration raids, several MAGA world figures, including Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, spread videos on social media that they falsely claimed depicted the city in a state of chaos. In reality, many of the images they shared don't come from the protests at all but were either taken at different times or in other countries entirely. Read more at Meidas Touch. Khaby Lame, a TikTok influencer who is reportedly the most followed person on the app, was forced to leave the U.S. after being detained by ICE agents last week. The agency said that Lame had overstayed his visa and was given the opportunity to leave voluntarily. Read more at MSBNC. Far-right influencer Steve Bannon's podcast, 'WarRoom,' has been welcomed back to Spotify. The audio streaming platform removed Bannon's content in 2020 after he said he'd like to see government officials — like then-FBI Director Christopher Wray and leading immunologist Anthony Fauci — beheaded and their heads put on pikes 'at the two corners of the White House as a warning to federal bureaucrats.' 'Following its temporary suspension and a constructive dialogue with the show's team, new 'Bannon's WarRoom' episodes are available on Spotify,' a spokesperson said in a statement. Read more at the New York Post. In a report released last week, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., highlighted more than 100 instances of possible corruption by Musk and other White House officials who appear to have advanced his business interests during his time as a 'special government employee.' A White House official referred to the report as 'toothless' in a statement to MSNBC and claimed Musk has done more than Warren to improve Americans' lives. But the statement didn't address any specific allegations. Read more at MSNBC. The University of Michigan says it is ending its contracts with outside vendors that provide plainclothes security, including a technology-focused security company, the Guardian reports. The outlet had previously reported that private investigators had been trailing and recording pro-Palestinian demonstrators. The university said it ended its contract after one of the company's employees engaged in behavior the school said went 'against our values and directives.' Read more at The Guardian. The Trump administration's rush to install AI tools across the federal government continues to run into some snags. An artificial intelligence tool developed by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency has caused some problems at the Department of Veterans Affairs over its tendency to spit out false information. Read more at ProPublica. A new report in Wired highlights how the term 'nonlethal,' used in reference to weapons that are often deployed against protesters, doesn't give the full picture of how harmful these weapons can be — or the extent to which their use on civilians is frowned upon in other nations. Read more at Wired. This article was originally published on
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Starbucks taps into health trends with protein coffee test
LAS VEGAS — Starbucks is tapping into the growing demand for protein-packed drinks as consumers seek to boost their intake for health and wellness. Why it matters: The world's largest coffee chain unveiled Tuesday that it is testing protein in its cold foam as part of its "Back to Starbucks" plan. CEO Brian Niccol is trying to reverse a decline in foot traffic and sales by returning to its roots. The big picture: Protein is hot and having a moment beyond social media influencers sharing order hacks. Restaurant brands like Dutch Bros Coffee and Smoothie King have added more protein to their products to cater to changing consumer appetites. Eating a high-protein diet is important to maintain muscle for people taking appetite-suppressing injectable treatments like Ozempic and Wegovy, research shows. Nearly 18 million Americans are expected to be taking versions of GLP-1 drugs by 2029, according to investment bank UBS. Zoom in: Niccol told Axios in an interview Tuesday that the protein cold foam being tested is for a number of different consumer groups including 20-year-old males, 50-year-old females and people taking GLP-1s. "I was watching people coming to our stores, they would get three shots of espresso over ice," Niccol said. "And in some cases, they pull their own protein powder out of their bag, or in other cases, they have a protein drink, like a Fair Life and they'd pour that into their drink." "I'm like, well, wait a second, we can make this experience better for them," he said. "The good news is now I think we're right on trend, and we can do it I think arguably better than anybody else." Flashback: Starbucks had protein smoothies in the past and launched its Vivanno shakes in 2008. They were discontinued in 2018. The company also launched a protein drink in the U.K. last year. The intrigue: Starbucks said the protein powder should be able to be added to any of its cold foam flavors. What's next: Starbucks is testing protein cold foam in five locations in the U.S. under its Starting Five model.
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Mayor Adams' ‘emergency' spending is out of control — now NYC must hit the brakes
New Yorkers, like all Americans, tend to stock up when any crisis is about to hit: We fill up our gas tanks, empty the bread and egg shelves at grocery stores and buy enough toilet paper to last for months. It's human nature — and for far too long, New York City's government has been behaving the very same way. But City Hall's panic reaction is far worse, and does far more damage. Advertisement In recent emergencies, like the COVID-19 pandemic and the asylum-seeker influx, city government kept on 'crisis buying' for more than a year, without ever comparing prices or rooting out contractor abuse, fraud and waste. It's time for drastic change: We must reform the city's out-of-control emergency procurement practices and add vital checks and balances. Currently, when the mayor declares a state of emergency, the city's comptroller and corporation counsel suspend their ordinary oversight regarding contracts and procurement. Advertisement In theory, this allows City Hall to respond quickly and obtain necessary goods and services to alleviate the crisis. In practice, it means the city can award no-bid contracts for up to one year — contracts that, having bypassed the competitive bidding that's normally required, can be rife with waste and abuse. Imagine purchasing a car or searching for your next apartment without competitively price-shopping for those big-ticket items. That's what City Hall does whenever the mayor declares an emergency. City agencies aren't even required to send 'emergency' contracts to the comptroller for auditing before laying out taxpayer cash. In fact, 84% of such contracts filed between January 2022 and September 2023 were submitted more than 31 days after the contract start date. Advertisement Both Mayor Eric Adams and former Mayor Bill de Blasio spent billions of dollars on the asylum-seeker and COVID crises, respectively, drawing multiple allegations of corruption and pay-to-play politics. This uncontrolled spending was especially acute during the pandemic, as de Blasio extended 'emergency' contracts a whopping 100-plus times and spent nearly $7 billion on emergency supplies with no oversight or limiting guardrails. In the private sector, affordability is a prime factor when choosing bids on contracts. The city's emergency procurement process throws such considerations to the wind, leading to reckless overspending. During COVID, City Hall paid top dollar for ventilators and N95 masks it never received — and in one case, paid an absurd $7.50 apiece for cloth masks. Advertisement Its fire sale of nearly $224 million worth of COVID-era surplus items, from ventilators to face shields, only recouped $500,000, a downright outrage. The current administration is no better, awarding a $432 million emergency contract for asylum-seeker services to an untested company called DocGo. Its dreadful performance — with problems like chronic food waste, moldy hotel rooms, unlicensed security guards and an uncredentialed CEO who was forced to resign — resulted in an investigation by the state attorney general. Even in non-emergency circumstances, the city has never reined in city contractors who utilize loopholes to enrich themselves. Take the company owned by David Levitan, listed as one of New York City's worst landlords. For over a quarter century, the city has repeatedly used Levitan's properties as homeless shelters — buildings with rotted floors, broken elevators, rat infestations and peeling lead paint. Levitan has even required some of the nonprofits operating shelters within his buildings to subcontract with his own maintenance or extermination companies to service the properties — reaping even more revenue from our tax dollars. It's time for reform, top to bottom. Advertisement Emergencies, by their very definition, are short in duration. Accordingly, they should necessitate a strictly time-limited use of no-bid contracts, for instances when competitive bidding will truly hinder the city's response. That's why I am introducing two bills in the New York City Council this week to update our lackadaisical, irresponsible procurement processes. These bills will limit all emergency contracts to 30 days, unless both the comptroller and corporation counsel approve of an extension. If passed, the laws will require all contracts be sent to the comptroller for auditing within 15 days of signing, and will increase subcontractor transparency with fines of up to $100,000 for not disclosing to the city any conflicts of interest or competing contractual obligations. Advertisement New York's broken contracting system has price-gouged our taxpayers for far too long — and recent mayoral administrations have shown no appetite to follow good-government procurement practices. It's up to the City Council to advance this vital legislation, saving precious fiscal resources, restoring responsibility and rooting out corruption. City Council Member Julie Menin (D) represents the East Side of Manhattan and chairs the Consumer and Worker Protection Committee.
