State of our unions: Ca-ching with a ring.(The Orlando Sentinel)

Byline: Eric Edwards

When it comes to my checkbook balance, I've always figured that the Man was keeping me down. I assumed there was a vast conspiracy that allowed my friends to acquire mountains of money while my idea of getting ahead was checking laundromat dryers for loose change.

But it turns out it's not the Man at all. By getting married, my friends virtually assure themselves of wealth, and by remaining single, I am costing myself riches beyond my wildest dreams.

A recent study published in The Journal of Marriage and Family alerted me to my misery by linking my moneymaking potential to my marital status. And being single just doesn't pay.

The study, authored by Dr. Mark R. Rank, contends that by the age of 45, 33 percent of married people will be affluent for at least a year. On the other hand, only 13 percent of single people will share in the same good fortune.

Rank defines affluence as earning more than 10 times the poverty level. I define it as being driven around in my Bentley by Justin Timberlake while Britney Spears rubs my feet. But that's why Rank is the doctor, and I'm just some single guy with delusions of grandeur.

I like the way Rank thinks, though. He says that single people are less likely to enjoy the benefits of wealth because living by oneself is only slightly less expensive than living with a spouse. And if the spouse can be cajoled into picking up a day job, then the household income rises dramatically while the cost of living stays pretty flat.