Hacker News Reader

Comment by TeMPOraL | Hacker News Reader

Yes. Weddings are such a ridiculous waste of money that it boggles the mind.

In my region, it is customary for the guests to give an envelope to the newlyweds, with the sum of money somewhat approximating the marginal costs of the guests' presence on the event. That is, if all the guests were nice and following the custom, the newlyweds would have recouped a big part of their expenses. In other words, a modern wedding is basically a process of transferring significant amounts of money from the guests to the caterers, photographers and venue owners.

Capitalism at its best.

View on HN

Weddings are inherently a party, so it's not surprising that some are extravagant. What world do you want to live in where there is no extravagance or anything extra?

It's a ceremony and party that is paid for. If you see it as a process of transferring money you are missing something quite important.

My wife and I married at the town hall with our parents and siblings as guests.

The only expense was the dress and dinner after and it totaled about 10000 NOK (€1000) so it doesn't have to be that expensive :)

We didn't have cake.

It's not a "modern" tradition.

Transferring wealth/power was the main reason weddings were created in the first place

Yeah, but that was supposed to be a transfer between families involved; currently, it's a transfer from families to third parties in the wedding industry.

How are the guests supposed to have any sort of idea what the wedding budget and number of attendees is?

No, you only need to have an idea of the ballpark figure for a seat at a table. Then you bump it up by 20% to 50% and apply a multiple related to your own circumstances and level of personal connection to the guest. Then you buy a gift worth around that or just give them money in an envelope. (Some couples make their preferences known in this regard, but generally speaking I would say that giving a well-chosen gift is nicer than just giving money.)

It is not quite the algorithmic process I have described, though. It is a matter of custom and manners and therefore people arrive at the appropriate behaviour mostly unconsciously.

I assure you that if you personally do not have any idea about this, your +1 does.

> generally speaking I would say that giving a well-chosen gift is nicer than just giving money

I feel this is sort of a thing that's false, but you're required to believe it. Looking at it from the receiving end, money is worth more than gift, because a gift will likely be useless, or duplicate, or at best it will lock down the couple's ability to get the equivalent they want (I give you a good toaster you don't like; you'll be inclined to keep it, even though you'd prefer to buy a different one yourself). Money is the best gift, because it's no-strings-attached.

I definitely noticed that the shift of preference from gifts to money is happening in the cultural sphere I live in. Of course things may be different elsewhere.

That's the thing. A bad gift is worse than money, but a good gift - something that the couple actually wants and would buy - is better because it (a) shows consideration and thoughtfulness and (b) saves the couple the time it would take to go out and buy the item. This is the principle behind wedding registries, of course.

Because presumably their family has thrown a few weddings themselves.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com