Wife and I don't see eye-to-eye on money

[Anonymous]

Ah well, yes it was but that was a different argument in my mind. It was the "this is the hardest job in the world" argument I was countering. And I used the $ amount to show what we value that work at as a society.

But I didn't address SAHM in terms of the financial relationship with the husband.

As in, what do I think would be a reasonable financial scenario for a family in which the mom elects to start at home with the kids while the dad works full time.

I don't really know where I am on that subject, haven't had to face it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm happy that works for you PP. Seriously. You both seems to have a good arrangement that works for you.

What's disgusting about your posts is that you are criticizing and demeaning other people who don't follow the same philosophy that you have. Women (and it seems to be only women, you know, the ones with the vaginas) are moochers, being subsidized, greedy assholes because they don't account to the penny and do a balance sheet every month. You are degrading households that come from a different perspective.

Look, good for you. It works for you (obviously). Shut up about how other people are choosing to live. Both perspectives are valid. I think the push back you're getting is from your "why do women feel entitled" bullshit. Many families live with shared household incomes. Many families don't.

actually if you read the thread its ME that was attacked ad hominem first

and I wasn't getting any rational reasons for the argument being made.

The one where you slam stay at home moms and then refer to your way as the "modern approach" thereby implying that other approaches are outdated? That one?

I never addressed SAHMs. I think that is a unique scenario that deserves its own consideration.

However, in the world of working parents, women's lib, and equality - equal expenses and labor is the only logical thing. And no one has made a cogent argument to the contrary.

Thank you so much for posting today. I sincerely, from the bottom of my heart, appreciate it. I am so glad that I'm not married to someone like you who has a mental spreadsheet going every day.

there is absolutely no mental spreadsheet

there was one calculation done at the beginning which basically determined the average monthly expenses.

now we just each add one sum at the beginning of the month of around $2000 each and then each $500 as needed a few times a month.

when the money runs out, we just add more. and there is no accounting of the joint account typically. we just have agreed as to which expenses are to be paid from there. and like i said, its all joint expenses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm happy that works for you PP. Seriously. You both seems to have a good arrangement that works for you.

What's disgusting about your posts is that you are criticizing and demeaning other people who don't follow the same philosophy that you have. Women (and it seems to be only women, you know, the ones with the vaginas) are moochers, being subsidized, greedy assholes because they don't account to the penny and do a balance sheet every month. You are degrading households that come from a different perspective.

Look, good for you. It works for you (obviously). Shut up about how other people are choosing to live. Both perspectives are valid. I think the push back you're getting is from your "why do women feel entitled" bullshit. Many families live with shared household incomes. Many families don't.

actually if you read the thread its ME that was attacked ad hominem first

and I wasn't getting any rational reasons for the argument being made.

The one where you slam stay at home moms and then refer to your way as the "modern approach" thereby implying that other approaches are outdated? That one?

I never addressed SAHMs. I think that is a unique scenario that deserves its own consideration.

However, in the world of working parents, women's lib, and equality - equal expenses and labor is the only logical thing. And no one has made a cogent argument to the contrary.

Thank you so much for posting today. I sincerely, from the bottom of my heart, appreciate it. I am so glad that I'm not married to someone like you who has a mental spreadsheet going every day.

there is absolutely no mental spreadsheet

there was one calculation done at the beginning which basically determined the average monthly expenses.

now we just each add one sum at the beginning of the month of around $2000 each and then each $500 as needed a few times a month.

when the money runs out, we just add more. and there is no accounting of the joint account typically. we just have agreed as to which expenses are to be paid from there. and like i said, its all joint expenses.

Are you the 37 old guy in an open relationship? He is someone that posts here occasionally and has the same overwrought quantitative mentality.

As for your split, it's not the numbers that are the problem (as far as I am concerned), it's the attitude. Apparently, it works for your wife but it would never work for me (or my husband). It's not about money - at all. I would never want to be with a guy who says or thinks the stuff you say.

[Anonymous]

Their issue is that it's a blended family (wanna guess why his first marriage fell apart?). He feels overburdened by all the kiddos, and possibly some spousal support, and married her only under the condition she wouldn't cost him more money. That's my guess, anyway.

My second guess is that once her children are old enough, she'll be out of there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Their issue is that it's a blended family (wanna guess why his first marriage fell apart?). He feels overburdened by all the kiddos, and possibly some spousal support, and married her only under the condition she wouldn't cost him more money. That's my guess, anyway.

My second guess is that once her children are old enough, she'll be out of there.

I earn $250k+. The burden is no issue. There is no spousal support. And there were no conditions about extra costs.

She and I are very happy, have a warm and honest relationship with lots of hot sex.



I dont know why I expected anything else from this discussion though, ad hominem is the only route people take here rather than actually considering the question. I know the question hits home, obviously. Not a single person has put forth a rational argument as to why a wife shouldn't contribute 50/50 or why she would literally be entitled to a subsidy. Name calling emotional responses, mentions of the 'way it should be' etc - but no real argument.

The only one that actually made any sense had to do with child bearing but I hardly doubt that most woman want to reduce their relationships with their husbands to an exchange like that - i.e. wife gets additional income in exchange for child rearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SAHMs:

We know what the value is for a SAHM because there is a market for the replacement of them - nannys.

You can have an experienced live in nanny for $40-50k. Housekeeper once a week for another $7500 per year.

So SAHM: your value to the household is around $60k MAX.

So please please please stop acting like its the "hardest job in the world" or that the value is some incalculably high number, it just isnt.

and btw folks, just because you are married doesn't mean everything has to be shared 100%. my wife and I keep separate bank accounts. we receive our paychecks and then contribute a fixed amount to the joint account. we retain the rest for use as we see fit.

I make 3:1 so naturally I get to retain a lot more.

We contribute 50/50 to household duties and have a nanny+housekeeper.

this is the modern approach

Ok, I will play your game. You forgot the following services as well:

--therapist. Because you have to listen to "working" DH bitch and offer advice and emtional support. Lets say that is $4000 a month, assuming you chat 4 xs a week at an hour each.

--cook. Never heard of a nanny cooking for the family as part of nanny duties. Private chef with credit card budget: say, $2,500 a month salary. This is the bottom of barrel low-end, I am sure she is worth more than that, with her carefully thought out healthy menus.

--sex. How much would you have to shell out for the sex? A LOT. Especially sex with an educated, clean woman who is in shape. Probably $5,000 a month plus.

--SAHM pays bills, balances accounts, deals with plumber, home deliveries, remembers IL's birthdays, books family flights. Personal assistant services: $2,000 a month.

That's another $162,000 a year. So, at least $220,000 a year to start. Throw in morning blowjobs, bringing you homemade sandwiches to lunch, raising stepkids and dealing with your crazy ex, managing and investing family money wisely, and the skys the limit on value.

If you want to take your life partner in life through thick and thin and reduce her to a number, then get the number right at least, fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAHMs:

We know what the value is for a SAHM because there is a market for the replacement of them - nannys.

You can have an experienced live in nanny for $40-50k. Housekeeper once a week for another $7500 per year.

So SAHM: your value to the household is around $60k MAX.

So please please please stop acting like its the "hardest job in the world" or that the value is some incalculably high number, it just isnt.

and btw folks, just because you are married doesn't mean everything has to be shared 100%. my wife and I keep separate bank accounts. we receive our paychecks and then contribute a fixed amount to the joint account. we retain the rest for use as we see fit.

I make 3:1 so naturally I get to retain a lot more.

We contribute 50/50 to household duties and have a nanny+housekeeper.

this is the modern approach

I am a FT working mom and I think you sound awful. I bet your wife is not crazy about your weird financial division. We share all our income, consult on every major purchase, and would never, ever make the lower earner feel less valued in our marriage. That isn't kind, and it certainly isn't "modern."

why is it awful that we should each contribute 50/50 to expenses and labor?

why are you entitled to my earnings because you have a vagina?

"My earnings?" Dear lord. Did you bring hefty assets to the marriage? If not, if its all earned while married, you shouldn't be so controlling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their issue is that it's a blended family (wanna guess why his first marriage fell apart?). He feels overburdened by all the kiddos, and possibly some spousal support, and married her only under the condition she wouldn't cost him more money. That's my guess, anyway.

My second guess is that once her children are old enough, she'll be out of there.

I earn $250k+. The burden is no issue. There is no spousal support. And there were no conditions about extra costs.

She and I are very happy, have a warm and honest relationship with lots of hot sex.



I dont know why I expected anything else from this discussion though, ad hominem is the only route people take here rather than actually considering the question. I know the question hits home, obviously. Not a single person has put forth a rational argument as to why a wife shouldn't contribute 50/50 or why she would literally be entitled to a subsidy. Name calling emotional responses, mentions of the 'way it should be' etc - but no real argument.

The only one that actually made any sense had to do with child bearing but I hardly doubt that most woman want to reduce their relationships with their husbands to an exchange like that - i.e. wife gets additional income in exchange for child rearing.

because your "question" is beside the point. normal people do not pose or think about such questions. it never occured to me (or my husband) to demand any kind of split - we simply married because we liked spending time together. the rest of the things (money, childcare, house chores etc) have just worked themselves out (for almost 20 years).

on the other hand, you are obviously very invested into it, both in the real life and here, and one has to wonder why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, no troll.

I'm the 50/50 guy.

Wife and I split all household duties 50/50 and all expenses 50/50

Seriously, please tell me why I am a piece of shit because of this??

How is 50/50 for everything "weird?"

We believe in equality in our household, equal work and equal share of expenses.

The most powerful and strong marriages are ones where the husband and wife are one unit. It sounds like you have more a roommate situation. There is a reason roommate situations dont last. Division of labor 50/50 is a fine idea. Its the whole "my money" fixation that you have that is getting everyone's gander up. Your marriage will be tested and it unclear if you guys will pull through as opposed to more open, trusting and vulnerable unions. For example, your wife loses her job and gets depressed. You develop a chronic illness that requires a lot of money to treat abd you are not working. Ummm...your framework is going to shake and buckle under such pressure. One of you is going to think the other person is failing to live up to the arrangement. Your system only works if both people stay eternally young, healthy and gainfully employed.

Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, no troll.

I'm the 50/50 guy.

Wife and I split all household duties 50/50 and all expenses 50/50

Seriously, please tell me why I am a piece of shit because of this??

How is 50/50 for everything "weird?"

We believe in equality in our household, equal work and equal share of expenses.

The most powerful and strong marriages are ones where the husband and wife are one unit. It sounds like you have more a roommate situation. There is a reason roommate situations dont last. Division of labor 50/50 is a fine idea. Its the whole "my money" fixation that you have that is getting everyone's gander up. Your marriage will be tested and it unclear if you guys will pull through as opposed to more open, trusting and vulnerable unions. For example, your wife loses her job and gets depressed. You develop a chronic illness that requires a lot of money to treat abd you are not working. Ummm...your framework is going to shake and buckle under such pressure. One of you is going to think the other person is failing to live up to the arrangement. Your system only works if both people stay eternally young, healthy and gainfully employed.

Good luck with that.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, no troll.

I'm the 50/50 guy.

Wife and I split all household duties 50/50 and all expenses 50/50

Seriously, please tell me why I am a piece of shit because of this??

How is 50/50 for everything "weird?"

We believe in equality in our household, equal work and equal share of expenses.

How much did you pay her for the physical toll of carrying your children and birthing them? I hear surrogates and donor eggs can run into 6 digits, whereas sperm donation costs just a few hundred dollars. I hope you appropriately compensated her for that so your marriage could remain "modern" and "equal".

Did she breastfeed? That's at least a 2-3 hour day a job. Not to mention more physical toll.

Point is- it's impossible to keep things "equal" in a marriage even in these modern times. I'm glad I'm not married to you pp, you sound like a pita.

She did breastfeed. And during that time period I certainly contributed more on the other items in the house like shopping, cooking, cleaning.

certainly you aren't suggesting that women only provide child and breastfeeding for financial renumeration?

Or that the joy of being a mother and the unique relationship it creates with the child especially from breast feeding isn't a reward in its own right?

You can't have it both ways. It doesn't matter if she enjoys a particular task so you wont compensate her. Either everything gets reduced to a price and the two of you haggle away, or you recognize that there are joys to family life that cannot be reduced to a price and stop hoarding your paycheck as yours.

You sound like a nightmare. You are taking advantage of your wife due to some baggage that you have over golddiggers, or being left penniless, or whatever. It sounds like you are aleeady laying the groundwork for divorce. That just doesn't sound right.

I mean, you're not rich, clearly. Your obsession with your money being stolen by your family is probably not good for the health of the marriage. You also seem to despise sahms. Big red flag. Why? What's that got to do with you?

--a non-sahm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, no troll.

I'm the 50/50 guy.

Wife and I split all household duties 50/50 and all expenses 50/50

Seriously, please tell me why I am a piece of shit because of this??

How is 50/50 for everything "weird?"

We believe in equality in our household, equal work and equal share of expenses.

How much did you pay her for the physical toll of carrying your children and birthing them? I hear surrogates and donor eggs can run into 6 digits, whereas sperm donation costs just a few hundred dollars. I hope you appropriately compensated her for that so your marriage could remain "modern" and "equal".

Did she breastfeed? That's at least a 2-3 hour day a job. Not to mention more physical toll.

Point is- it's impossible to keep things "equal" in a marriage even in these modern times. I'm glad I'm not married to you pp, you sound like a pita.

She did breastfeed. And during that time period I certainly contributed more on the other items in the house like shopping, cooking, cleaning.

certainly you aren't suggesting that women only provide child and breastfeeding for financial renumeration?

Or that the joy of being a mother and the unique relationship it creates with the child especially from breast feeding isn't a reward in its own right?

No I'm suggesting that your definition of equal is in fact unequal given the different biological responsibilities in regards to having a child.

You also hopefully have a unique relationship with your child which didn't come at the cost of many physical factors. How is your pelvic floor pp? Also anyone who calls breastfeeding a "reward in its own right" needs to acquaint themselves with the pain and exhaustion that being someone's sole food supply is as well as the newborn latch. Breastfeeding is a gift to the child not a reward for the mother. You sound more ignorant with every post.

I'm starting to wonder if you actually have a wife/child or if this is your plan for the future that you are test driving on DCUM.

I assure you I am very real and this is a real experience. I am sorry that you didn't find breast feeding and the increase bond to your child rewarding.

My husband just looked at this and said "he's never been around a new mother learning to breastfeed".

Troll. This guy is easily 25-30. How he ended up on this forum is beyond me. No seasoned father would make these statements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, no troll.

I'm the 50/50 guy.

Wife and I split all household duties 50/50 and all expenses 50/50

Seriously, please tell me why I am a piece of shit because of this??

How is 50/50 for everything "weird?"

We believe in equality in our household, equal work and equal share of expenses.

How much did you pay her for the physical toll of carrying your children and birthing them? I hear surrogates and donor eggs can run into 6 digits, whereas sperm donation costs just a few hundred dollars. I hope you appropriately compensated her for that so your marriage could remain "modern" and "equal".

Did she breastfeed? That's at least a 2-3 hour day a job. Not to mention more physical toll.

Point is- it's impossible to keep things "equal" in a marriage even in these modern times. I'm glad I'm not married to you pp, you sound like a pita.

She did breastfeed. And during that time period I certainly contributed more on the other items in the house like shopping, cooking, cleaning.

certainly you aren't suggesting that women only provide child and breastfeeding for financial renumeration?

Or that the joy of being a mother and the unique relationship it creates with the child especially from breast feeding isn't a reward in its own right?

You can't have it both ways. It doesn't matter if she enjoys a particular task so you wont compensate her. Either everything gets reduced to a price and the two of you haggle away, or you recognize that there are joys to family life that cannot be reduced to a price and stop hoarding your paycheck as yours.

You sound like a nightmare. You are taking advantage of your wife due to some baggage that you have over golddiggers, or being left penniless, or whatever. It sounds like you are aleeady laying the groundwork for divorce. That just doesn't sound right.

I mean, you're not rich, clearly. Your obsession with your money being stolen by your family is probably not good for the health of the marriage. You also seem to despise sahms. Big red flag. Why? What's that got to do with you?

--a non-sahm

+1
--career woman

[Anonymous]

There are many many documented advantages to breast feeding mothers including:

"Immediately after birth, the repeated suckling of the baby releases oxytocin from the mother's pituitary gland. "

Oxytocin - the bonding chemical - the love chemical

Breastfeeding is, among many other things, a physiologically bonding experience for baby and mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their issue is that it's a blended family (wanna guess why his first marriage fell apart?). He feels overburdened by all the kiddos, and possibly some spousal support, and married her only under the condition she wouldn't cost him more money. That's my guess, anyway.

My second guess is that once her children are old enough, she'll be out of there.

I earn $250k+. The burden is no issue. There is no spousal support. And there were no conditions about extra costs.

She and I are very happy, have a warm and honest relationship with lots of hot sex.



I dont know why I expected anything else from this discussion though, ad hominem is the only route people take here rather than actually considering the question. I know the question hits home, obviously. Not a single person has put forth a rational argument as to why a wife shouldn't contribute 50/50 or why she would literally be entitled to a subsidy. Name calling emotional responses, mentions of the 'way it should be' etc - but no real argument.

The only one that actually made any sense had to do with child bearing but I hardly doubt that most woman want to reduce their relationships with their husbands to an exchange like that - i.e. wife gets additional income in exchange for child rearing.

I did present an argument which you ignored. I notice you tend to do that.