I can live without money, but I cannot live without love.

The line contrasts material security with emotional sustenance, asserting that affection and human connection are more essential to a meaningful life than financial resources. Read as a personal credo, it frames “money” as survivable deprivation—something one can do without—while “love” is presented as a non-negotiable condition for living fully. The quote’s appeal lies in its stark binary: it elevates intimacy, belonging, and care above status or comfort, and it implicitly critiques a culture that treats wealth as the primary measure of well-being. Even when taken as a general maxim rather than a documented statement, it functions as a romantic, humanist valuation of inner needs over external possessions.