Can money buy us love? It seems that there is no simple answer to this question. If love is like religion, then it cannot be bought nor can it be negotiated. If romantic interaction is similar to a commercial transaction, then love can be bought and can be negotiated (and compromised). Love seems to be similar to both, but identical to neither.
Avishi Margalit describes two pictures of politics: politics as economics and politics as religion. If politics is viewed as economics, it is entirely subject to compromise and exchange. If politics is viewed as religion, there are aspects that must be considered sacrosanct and on which we must never negotiate or compromise. Margalit argues that economic life is based on substitution: one good can be replaced by another. Accordingly, there is ample room for negotiation and compromise in economic life.
Is love similar to religion or to economics? It seems that in different aspects, love is similar to both religion and commercial behavior.
In many respects, romantic love resembles a kind of religion (see here). They are similar in that they dictate basic beliefs, demand fundamental moral standards, and bestow high personal value upon their objects. The basic assumptions underlying the Romantic Ideology can indeed be found in many monotheistic religions. Like many religions, the Romantic Ideology is basically characterized by its comprehensive and uncompromising nature. Not unlike the function of religion, love is considered to give meaning to life, to overcome all obstacles, and to offer a share in eternity. The similarity between love and religion is also expressed in the resemblance of the beloved to God. The beloved is often characterized as "the sweetest angel in heaven and on earth," and as a "divine gift." The beloved is perceived to be a perfect person whose existence cannot be comprehended.
The relationship between God and His people has been described in the Bible and elsewhere in romantic terms, such as betrothal and marriage. When the People of Israel followed their idols, they were like an unfaithful lover-their activities are described as betraying God and as committing adultery and prostitution. God is described as jealous of the People of Israel. Pope Benedict XVI argues that "Corresponding to the image of a monotheistic God is monogamous marriage. Marriage based on exclusive and definitive love becomes the icon of the relationship between God and His people and vice versa." Fidelity to God and marital fidelity are celebrated as the highest human achievements.
In the above descriptions, love is depicted as something sacred that money cannot buy, just as money cannot buy God and cannot change normative behaviors that are prescribed by the holy religion.
However, there are also similarities between romantic and commercial behavior. This similarity is expressed, for instance, in the way that romantic partners are chosen nowadays. Modern technology, and especially the Internet, enables people to choose their romantic partners in the way they select a certain commodity. Thus, people can refer to very specific features that are not necessarily related to love. When someone writes on a dating site that he is seeking a vegetarian Jewish woman who is interested in African wildlife, his process is not dissimilar to the way in which he might itemize the attributes he wants in a specific commodity, such as a car.
The role of money in generating or in transacting loving relationships is expressed, for example, in the content of personal ads seeking romantic partners. Thus, the requirement that prospective partners are financially secure is often mentioned in ads placed by women. Indeed, while both men and women prefer good-looking partners, women consider other qualities, such as status and money, to compensate for looks. It is interesting to note that many men prefer a spouse who makes less money than they do and whose occupational status is lower than theirs. But this is due to men's concern about their self-esteem rather than to the issue of love. It might, however, be further indication that money and status influence the generation of love.
Money and status are certainly related to the generation of sexual desire and satisfaction. A survey of hundreds of Italian women indicates that two-thirds found greater sexual satisfaction from "powerful men in socially respected positions"-bosses and rich people are perceived to be better in bed. Indeed, in comparison with love, it is easier to buy and sell sexual desire. (Although commercial sex is quite successful, it has its own emotional limitations; even prostitutes offer no money-back guarantees.) The exchangeable nature of sex is also expressed in the ease with which sexual desire can be aroused by using the imagination, whether by people imagining themselves with someone other than the person they are actually with, or by imagining the person they are with to be more attractive than he actually is.
Money might not be as important to love itself, but love is hardly disconnected from reality. It is grounded in an actual framework of life, and the flourishing of this framework can depend upon having more money. This is one reason why many people would marry someone who possesses lots of qualities they admire, but with whom they are not in love.
In a fortunate framework of life, positive emotions, including love, are more likely to be generated. Extremely negative situations, such as loneliness, can also generate love, but this might be superficial love that depends more on current circumstances than on the deep, stable characteristics of the lovers.
In the Jewish Ethics of the Fathers, there is the following claim: "Whenever love depends upon something [external to love], and then this thing passes, then the love passes away too. But if love does not depend upon something like this, then love will never pass away."
Indeed, we are familiar with statements such as: "You don't love me; you just love my body (or my beauty, money, kindness, humor, wisdom, etc.)." This statement is voiced not only when it is concerned with features perceived as superficial, such as beauty and money, but also with regard to more profound features, such as kindness, humor and wisdom. Beauty and money are not regarded as legitimate reasons for love, whereas kindness and wisdom are more so, since they express characteristics more fundamental to us. Nevertheless, none of these reasons alone is perceived to be sufficient for romantic love. Such love requires the presence of many aspects belonging to both the praiseworthiness and the attraction of the partner.
The situation concerning happiness is similar-money cannot buy long-term happiness, but it certainly can be helpful in creating the circumstances that induce such happiness. There are indeed various studies that have found a positive correlation between income and long-term happiness. Like with love, the effect of money on happiness is not very strong and there are other factors that are even more important than money for happiness (and love). Social factors, such as marriage, family, friends, and children, are more significant in determining long-term happiness than economic elements such as job, income, and standard of living. Money, however, can improve our situation in a way that gives us more occasions for happiness.
Money cannot buy love and love cannot buy money, but money increases the chances of love and love decreases the need for money. When one is in love, money is of less significance, and when one lacks money for basic needs, love is often more at risk.
To sum up, love is considered to be partially sacred while also having exchangeable elements found in commercial commodities. Money can help to generate love but it cannot buy love-at most, it can buy sex. It is easier to fall in love with a rich person, as money can generate circumstances that are more favorable for love and living with someone who is wealthy can make life easier. Hence, beautiful young women are attracted to rich old men, and in some cases genuine love is indeed generated.
The above considerations can be encapsulated in the following statement that a lover might express: "Darling, it is so hard to love you when you are earning less money than my sister's husband is."