When it comes to dating, should a guy and a girl both have money of their own (like jobs), independence, and confidence?

For the independence and confidence, of course. Everyone should. For the money and jobs thing, it would be nice. Both partners could take turns spending money on each other for dates, special occasions and presents. I am a poor girl who has to use the majority of my paycheck for rent, while my guy friend (who I like) has money to spend from his job and can afford to buy me stuff. I have a hard time doing so however. It makes you feel pretty bad when you can’t afford to spend money on someone you like and they can. So I would prefer to also have a job and money for a relationship so I can show my partner how much I care about them. 

Definitely! I feel both partners need separate goals and duties in life. You don’t want to reply on your partner for anything bc you never know what may happen. Me and my boyfriend has been going out for a year and he’s the only one who has a job and a car but he knows my situation and I have my own money anyways (not my moms) it honestly depends on how the guy or girl feels in a relationship but I think so 

Yes. No one likes a moocher. If the guy asked the girl out he should pay though. But I don’t see myself asking a guy I’m dating to pay my bills. But if you guys are living together there should be some arrangement of who will pay what or some contribution to the mutual household

It helps give financial stability to the relationship..

Well,i thought Dating ..and Since ..means cotton wear company in usa not jobs .

And for the time being it looks that this is the independence as you are forced to process of Divorce by some Animal Planet who is a sexual exibition in Courts while they use some terrifying inquisitory procedure of a papal Court dating back a half of tousand years ago ..actually this means that the parliaments are some impostor masons who are resident in Uk where there is Queen also in Usa where they preserved a Court of Acusation during Republican -Democrat congress i mean your process of divorces can be held only at Washington Dc and Divorce is not the object of process ..i think your Court of of Homosexual.and lesbiens as gender ..some new species .

There is a mouvie with Mike Rourke with an obscene scene with a woman lawyer i think that is a proof that the whole Court is of Lesbiens not of Cardinals and anyway we here are ortodox at least the priest who at least is a priest and led into temptatiin by coup s d etait by gipsy priests not known -..but at least he gives the divorce to whom.come talks not forces to more other sodomic person in plus to appear there for divorce ..

Also it s obviously that since that does not appear would be homosexuality to be required ..-thing done by Court .
Also the Bible doesn t request any confession to clergy or witness for divorces.
Usa uk urss ue pope should be under arest ..there are a lot of porn movies and mahazines while they keep divorces in monarhic Courts instead of civil rights .

Actually the parliament is of rapists who rape even men instead of political.and civil rights and rights to own  money emission and on each country necessity...
It also provides an homosexual and sodomic english exploitation of the Man and Woman ....like machines behind which they gain money instead of using there families ..and this is ilegal by the way..and made legal by the Beast .

Yes. Anything else would put a strain on the relationship. 

Yes. Otherwise power shifts to the partner who has more 

I am so sorry greedy people and racists have changed or eliminated, a lot from our history books.  Before WWII, women were not allowed to work, unless their family owned the business, or they were very smart. 95% of all middle to upper management jobs were done by men.  As I said, women were not allowed to have these jobs unless their family owned the business. only about 10% of women worked and most of them were secretaries. During WWII 30% of the work force were women. When the men came back from war, Women working dropped to 20%.  And half of them were married.  The rest of the women did not work, over the next 30 yrs it got to be 40-50% women in the work force and most were getting 20-40% less pay.  I hear the pay difference in some jobs are equal, but as of a few yrs ago, there were still companies paying 10-15% less to women employees than the men.  I am older, and our generation are more likely to pay, for the first few dates.  But by the 4th or 5th date, I would expect then woman to treat me, buy dinner, or a day out, or make me dinner at hers or my place.  by the 10th date you should know how much you both make, and it should be shared of the cost going out.  For equality it should be 50/50, but usually never is. one will always make more money.  After than you both should look at how much money you both have to date and do fun things. When I was starting out at my new job, I worked at restaurants, and was able to take home left overs. Same was when I worked for an airline, when we served meals, and there was not a day when you looked into my frig, you would have found at least 5 chicken Kiev, or Lasagna.  I dated, but not serious most of the time from 24-29.  But did have a few relationships with women who also did not make a lot. So we looked at what he had to spend for fun, together, some months I paid more, and sometimes she paid more.  For casual dating, and flings, usually the man pays.     

The guy should always have 10. 572 percent more than the girl so things even out in the end.