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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

yes i brought assets to the marriage.

thats not the point though.

it is my earnings. i work for them i earn them the comes to me. its mine. she has her earnings. she works for them they go to her. my career was well established, all schooling done and accounted for when we met. so why is she "entitled" to some portion of that?

thats really what i am wondering, where does the sense of entitlement come from?

if and when the time comes that i need to contribute above and beyond what she is capable of i will consider it, the context, the need and i'm sure if it is reasonable i'll certainly have no problem. especially in the event of sickness or unemployment.

but that should be something i willingly offer, not something that is in anyway entitled by either one of us.

she is due to inherit a large sum of money, and i have absolutely no expectations to any of it (or legal claim). i am happy to know she will be well taken care of no matter what happens to me. also why i carry life insurance, and indeed, why she is the beneficiary of my estate should i die (aside from the legal requirements).

but these are choices we all make under no sense that is entitled by anyone.

i'm also puzzled as to why folks seem to believe that a marriage cant be fulfilling and warm and loving with this type of financial management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

ha its been hard to keep up with. which argument was that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

no you never considered it, likely because you just assumed that you were entitled to all his earnings without any question, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am pretty sure he is 37. There was this guy a few weeks ago prattling about his market value and how, as he entered middle age, he is having more and more sexual choices. It turned out he is divorced (2kids) and has another child with an under 30 girlfriend but sleeps around all the time with hot 20+ olds. His girlfriend is totally ok with it, though she doesn't do the same and dreams of having another child with him. She is like a perfect ten in every respect (no, really), its just that even being so, she cant keep a guy with his value solely for herself. He was also bizarrely obsessed with his desirability on the sexual market and what kind of dating strategies maximize his life pleasures.

That guy also constantly complained about feminism and how nobody here can keep the discussion at the intellectual level he finds satisfying.

Maybe this is not him, but I find it unlikely such similar cognitive pattern would appear at random.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

no you never considered it, likely because you just assumed that you were entitled to all his earnings without any question, right?

Entitled in what sense? What questions would i need to ask to be entitled?

We make significant purchase decisions together, the rest just flows somehow. We have separate accounts, btw, but I don't even know my own passwords for my accounts. He tells me when I get my salary deposited, because he is more conscientious about online security and such. I have no clue how we split costs, honesty, just that we never had any issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

no you never considered it, likely because you just assumed that you were entitled to all his earnings without any question, right?

Entitled in what sense? What questions would i need to ask to be entitled?

We make significant purchase decisions together, the rest just flows somehow. We have separate accounts, btw, but I don't even know my own passwords for my accounts. He tells me when I get my salary deposited, because he is more conscientious about online security and such. I have no clue how we split costs, honesty, just that we never had any issues.

I appreciate your honesty.

Did you two live together before you got married?

[Anonymous]

Interesting question: assets brought to the marriage are protected in event of a divorce. education expenses and career building should be considered an asset that generates greater cash flow in later years. why is that not protected as well if the education was bought and paid for and career established prior?

[Anonymous]

NP here. We also spend $15,000 per month and DH always comments on my spending.

What does your bills, etc include? $500-600 is way low for food. Do you never eat out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

no you never considered it, likely because you just assumed that you were entitled to all his earnings without any question, right?

Entitled in what sense? What questions would i need to ask to be entitled?

We make significant purchase decisions together, the rest just flows somehow. We have separate accounts, btw, but I don't even know my own passwords for my accounts. He tells me when I get my salary deposited, because he is more conscientious about online security and such. I have no clue how we split costs, honesty, just that we never had any issues.

I appreciate your honesty.

Did you two live together before you got married?

No.

[Anonymous]

Um, she is entitled to your earnings because you are married, have kids together, and you said in your op that your encouraged her to quit her job to stay home with the kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

If this was written by the PP that keeps posting, game over. This is insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um, she is entitled to your earnings because you are married, have kids together, and you said in your op that your encouraged her to quit her job to stay home with the kids!

The PP that keeps posting about what is the modern way and his arrangement with his wife being "50/50" is not the OP of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

If this was written by the PP that keeps posting, game over. This is insane.

how is that insane?

http://www.llli.org/nb/nbjulaug01p124.html

"A Well-Kept Secret
Breastfeeding's Benefits to Mothers
Alicia Dermer, MD, IBCLC "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

no you never considered it, likely because you just assumed that you were entitled to all his earnings without any question, right?

This is where you keep losing people PP. No one is posting about feeling "entitled." These are massive assumptions you're making about people who don't follow the same game plan you and your wife are following. This is why you are turning people off. People are more than capable of having rational discussions with their spouses - their family - and come to different conclusions about what works best for their families without it being a sense of entitlement by one spouse or someone being subsidized by another.

I really wonder what your sense of family is. Because for you, it's a zero sum game, all based on money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

If this was written by the PP that keeps posting, game over. This is insane.

how is that insane?


http://www.llli.org/nb/nbjulaug01p124.html

"A Well-Kept Secret
Breastfeeding's Benefits to Mothers
Alicia Dermer, MD, IBCLC "

Ask 10 dads that have lived through newborns learning to breastfeed about the benefits to the mom. 0 will copy and paste a selection from LLL. Probably all 10 will offer words of compassion and possibly a bottle of wine.
-LLL member