Love and power

We are owned by our possessions. This is why wealthy individuals are empowered by becoming charitable.  Misers are increasingly owned by their assets until they are eventually caged by them.

By giving up our possessions we are empowered with freedom.  This applies to the people we own as well as the inanimate objects.This does not mean the benefits outweigh the costs, it just means that the more you are able to surrender your possessions, the less they own you.  

If we accept the need for other people, the need for love, what is suggested by this, what type of relationship is good in light of this, is it slavery, freedom or some combination of the two.

I deny the idea that this suggests two people cannot be together but it might mean that there is a balance between freedom and love or perhaps an interplay that is required for a healthy relationship

Two people (or more) can add to each others freedom or can reduce it.

Empowerment comes from one persons irregardless of the other.  You must give up you possessions to be empowered, you must reject the binds of society.  What do you have to do with someone you love?

Love means trusting someone.  Freedom is not inconsistent with trust, they are very different.  If you don't allow yourself to trust, you protect yourself and your freedom, but you give up love.  Is that better or is it better to accept the possibility of intense pain in exchange for the surrender to love.If I am happy with you and happy without you I'm just happy
If I'm frustrated with and frustrated without you I'm frustrated
This is not clear to me, so I will have to wait till I have a moment of greater clarity, so more on this later.