My husband and I have different newspaper preferences.

He likes a paper offering a lot of national and international news while that's not my cup of tea.I prefer a local paper that tells me everything going on in my area. And I love stories about interesting local people.Whenever I read a local item with information I think David should know, I pass it along to him. He does the same thing when he finds an article he thinks I will like. That's all good.But I wondered if he was trying to be subtle when he put a section of the Wall Street Journal next to my plate. The newspaper was carefully folded so I would focus on an article titled "When 'enough' doesn't have to mean more."The subtitle was "I've learned to be happy with what I have."I wondered if it was his subtle way of giving me a message. Sharing a newspaper article could be a simple courtesy. Or, it could be his nonaggressive way of getting some point across.Readers know I often write about the wisdom of being happy with what we have and the folly of constantly seeking "more."In fact I just wrote a column about how much of life many of us waste by always wanting more stuff. It's a waste of money as well as a waste of time, because after we buy more stuff, that means we have more things to take care of.I've also written a past column lauding some wise folks who have found an exhilarating sense of freedom by paring down possessions. Instead of seeking more stuff, they are focusing their lives on more important and more meaningful pursuits.I've always believed that most of the important things in life can't be bought. Once we have the basics - a safe roof over our head and plentiful food in the refrigerator, we have all we need.In other words, I am content with what I have. In fact, there have been times when my husband mentioned that is one of my traits that he appreciates.He knows I'm not always in pursuit of more "stuff."So why in the world would he make a special point of laying out that "learning to be happy with what you have" article for me?Did he mean something personal by it?Or was it just an interesting article he thought was worth sharing?Did you ever notice how husbands and wives will sometimes silently wonder about motives? But they won't mention it.The logical thing for me would have been to ask David if there was something personal in why he thought I should read the article. But I didn't.Instead, I just wondered if he gave me the article because of our recent conversation with a neighbor who was complaining about the high cost of putting in a boatlift."Oh, we have two boatlifts, but no boat. Isn't that a shame?" I commented.When we continued our walk, I told David I realize it's no longer prudent to buy a boat. But every time I see a perfect little used boat for sale I would wish we could buy it.As usual, he didn't answer. But maybe that's what went through his mind when he gave me the article.Instead of talking about it, I did what spouses sometimes do. I got even by giving him an article to read.It just so happened that the same Wall Street Journal section he gave me also had a cover story about retirement savings. It said some people are really good about saving for retirement. But once they retire, they are reluctant to spend anything that isn't absolutely necessary.The article made the point that some can't get around the emotional block of not spending. Instead they live far more frugally than they would have to.I told David he "had to read the article" because it made some good points about doing things like traveling while you still have good health.David insisted he didn't need to read it because there's nothing more he wants. After living with him for almost 10 years, I can vouch for that.If it costs money, he doesn't want it.My neighbor is married to a man with the same frugal nature. "There's a difference between being frugal and being cheap. Tom is cheap!" she complained.Her husband of 62 years just laughed at her comments. "You're right," he said. "It's always been my nature."They go away only once a year and stay with relatives. She wants "a real vacation" while they still can travel. He likes things just the way they are."You would think after being married for 62 years we would have come to a better compromise," she said.She added that all those years of marriage have taught her sometimes you just have to accept things the way they are."If you want a happy marriage, you have to accept 'what is, is.' There are some things you can change in your spouse over the years. But mostly, you can't. That's when you tell yourself, 'what is, is.' And don't make a big deal of it," said my long-married friend.It sounds simplistic but it's good advice.What is, is.Contact Pattie Mihalik at

newsgirl@comcast.net.