# Best way to manage money in this situation?



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

Hi folks, I am in a serious (but quite possibly breaking-down) relationship where we cannot agree about how to handle finances. I am thinking of "early retiring" in 5 years since I will have saved enough money to do so, but this will realistically only cover my expenses, not both of ours. I've worked on this goal for a long time and can't wait to quit the rat race. Her financial situation is very different - she is a giver (one of the reasons I love her), but this also means she has only small savings and if she stayed alone, she would have to continue working for at least the next 30-40 years before thinking about retiring.

She wants to combine everything and can't imagine world otherwise. Everything is "ours" in her world. I like the idea but...

In my mind, if we combine everything, how can I possibly stop working in 5 years when the combined amount won't be nearly enough for the two of us? I feel like I have to make a choice between marriage and working for 10-15 extra years OR a break up... If everything were "ours", I can just imagine her thinking why is he not working and just relaxing while I have work?

My savings are an asset that will generate an income stream, which might be small, but definitely enough to cover my expenses. I've earned and saved enough for this goal... So do you think it's fair and reasonable of her to expect me to work for another decade or two? 

What if I were already retired and was already living off of my investments? Should I then start working in order to marry her?

I can't come up with a good way of combining money in this situation in such a way that she would not feel resentful that I am not working and I would not feel guilty for enjoying the product of my labor, which I certainly plan on doing if I remain single...

What do you think?


----------



## greenpearl (Sep 3, 2010)

I find this very confusing. 

I am trying to use a nice way to talk to you in order not to offend you. 

What do you mean by all this? 

Aren't men suppose to provide for their women. 

Doesn't she give you what you want? 

Do you have a great sex life with her?

Do you have a happy life with her?

Do you have a good companion? 

She is giving, you are happy. How about you? 

Living alone and enjoying your money, I don't think you can because life alone is miserable. 

So what, you have to work more years? You have a happy life with her. 

People care too much about money and themselves, that's why they are lost!

Let go of yourself, stop thinking just about yourself. Start thinking about others, your life will be much happier. 

You may not need to retire full time, you can work part time and still keep things going fine. 

And staying at home doing nothing is boring. 

I don't want to retire. If my health allows it, I want to work as many years as I can.


----------



## takris (Sep 22, 2010)

Let's just say something happens to you. Accident, disease or something life changing. You're okay with her tossing you away when you can't take care of yourself?

Or she decides one day that she wants to spend time in Italy, this year, France the next, and so on, and has grown her career to support it. Maybe if you can't afford it, would you be willing to let her go with someone who can?

Seriously, you should probably look for someone financially independent.

Some people marry for intangibles, like partnership and growing together, which add up to offset quite a few tangible assets.

Not trying to be sarcastic, but if you take your idea to its logical conclusion, you'll possibly find yourself at odds with a large majority of women.


----------



## rome2012 (Sep 10, 2010)

One other question....I don't know how old you are, but could you really see yourself not working anymore at all ?!?!


----------



## Chelhxi (Oct 30, 2008)

You're probably just not compatible enough. I'm all about the early retirement. Luckily, so is my husband and we're both savers. 
But, I agree with you - wouldn't be comfortable carrying someone along after all that saving. There are certainly couples where one is retired and one continues to work. How far apart are your ages? I think this quite a different situation than the typical of both being young and broke and combine everything then.

But I don't think like the average person.
You might want to check out this forum too, for the financial and retirement side of things more.

Early Retirement & Financial Independence Community


----------



## chefmaster (Oct 30, 2010)

I'm kinda getting a sense the reason you don't want to combine everything is because she is a giver(not really sure what that means since it has caused her to have a smaller savings) and will deplete your savings faster, whether you were supporting her or not.

The main confusion though is being caused by you not only trying to plan a retirement for her but by trying to intertwine the plan with yours. It almost never works, there are too many variables.

In the long run I believe you are over-thinking this, you two love each other I say go for it.

You obviously have a handle on your finances and have full intentions of setting limitations on spending. So set them and stick to them as you have planned and enjoy your lives together.



-----------------------
"Cooking is like love. It should be entered into with abandon or not at all." -Harriet Van Horne


----------



## rome2012 (Sep 10, 2010)

chefmaster said:


> I'm kinda getting a sense the reason you don't want to combine everything is because she is a giver(not really sure what that means since it has caused her to have a smaller savings) and will deplete your savings faster, whether you were supporting her or not.
> 
> The main confusion though is being caused by you not only trying to plan a retirement for her but by trying to intertwine the plan with yours. It almost never works, there are too many variables.
> 
> ...


I agree....if you love each other....stay together but make sure that she gets a handle on the "giving"....

Kinda have a similar situation with my husband....he is a saver and I'm a "giver" and he decided to divorce me


----------



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

Thank you for the responses so far. Please keep them coming. My responses are below.

@chefmaster: Sorry, I don't subscribe to your philosophy about men who are "supposed to" provide for their women. I understand that many people do however, and that's OK with me. In many societies there is no other way in fact due to the (lack of) rights / opportunities and cultural pressures on the women. You did not offend me. I am just not looking for a housewife though. To answer your other questions, I am indeed happy with her when it comes to most other things, just like she is happy with me in most other things.

@takris: No, I would not be OK with her tossing me out, just like if something happened to her I would not toss her out either, but would then try to find a way around it - and indeed go back to work if that's what it takes. But it's one thing when your spouse gets disabled, and another when you are expected to carry both just in order to be in a relationship. 

For your other example, if she wants to do something together that I cannot afford, then either she will sponsor it or I will not be able to go. Same applies in reverse. If I wanted to do something and she does not feel like she wants to spend the money for it, I would have to make the same choice. These choices are no different from whether I work or I don't. Either way, we may disagree on whether we can or cannot afford something, and at least if we have separate finances, one may decide to "sponsor" the other as another option.

You are absolutely right in that I will find myself at odds with a large majority of women. 

@Dale&Alex: yes, I can see myself not working anymore at all. I have more than enough hobbies that entertain me and will keep me busy. Unfortunately, I could not get paid to do them.

@Chelhxi: thanks for understanding. I am hoping there is some solution though... :-\ We are not that far apart in our ages (I am about 4-5 years older). And yes, it's much easier to combine finances when two people are in similar situations and have similar financial approaches to life.



chefmaster said:


> In the long run I believe you are over-thinking this, you two love each other I say go for it.
> 
> You obviously have a handle on your finances and have full intentions of setting limitations on spending. So set them and stick to them as you have planned and enjoy your lives together.


I think you are saying "go for it" meaning I should just forget about my financial goals (or at least set them aside for another 10-15 years)... ? Setting spending limits, or rather (painfully?) negotiating them under combined finances, would not make things happen faster than working another 10-15 years for me, since I would need to build up savings for her, even if she spent the same way I do.


----------



## takris (Sep 22, 2010)

The point I was trying to make without offending others is that if you read modern studies of women and marriage, you'll find that after about 15 to 20 years, many women will say that their life is made harder by having a man around. Some would not do it if they could have a choice. The only thing that keeps them there are the intangibles, the lifestyle available with merging incomes and financial security. You're removing a couple of these, in a sense. She might tell you one thing now, but will be highly likely to say another thing in a few years after her friends brag about their lifestyle.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Justin123 said:


> She wants to combine everything and can't imagine world otherwise. Everything is "ours" in her world. I like the idea but...


 I think this is a REASONABLE expectation when you marry and more so, IF she is good with money, frugal and a Saver. If she is NOT, then I understand your concern. Even some marraiges are fine with keeping it separate if they both work and dont agree on spending habits. 




Justin123 said:


> I feel like I have to make a choice between marriage and working for 10-15 extra years OR a break up...


 It really does come down to what YOU want MORE >> is retiring more important to you or this woman and your Love for her , a marraige ?? Money or companionship. If you can not do a compromise and this will eat at her, you may have to make this hard choice. 



Justin123 said:


> ... So do you think it's fair and reasonable of her to expect me to work for another decade or two?


 You don't feel it is fair & reasonable (at this point anyway), and if you feel very very strongly about this, she needs to know. You don't want to go into a marraige having resentment that you MUST keep working. 

If your love is SO much for her, you would not likely feel this. Some men would climb mountains for their women. 



Justin123 said:


> What if I were already retired and was already living off of my investments? Should I then start working in order to marry her??


 I think you need to decide what you REALLY want here, the single carefree life or Marraige with this woman, as it sounds if you choose marraige, the working will likely need to continue. You have already admitted as much.

Will she leave if you are not the marrying kind ?


----------



## Chelhxi (Oct 30, 2008)

If you want to continue with the relationship then, you need some agreement in terms of money. It sounds like all money combined would not work for you, and completely separate would not work for her. There should be a compromise available. Personally, my husband and I do completely separate, but for various reasons that works for us very well right now, but is not for everyone, and probably won't continue to the end.

So, could you compromise on having joint and separate accounts? You both agree what $ or % you both contribute to the joint household and then do what you will with the remainder? Do you live together yet? I found that after marriage, splitting expenses 50/50 my personal expenses were a bit less than before marriage, so it helps with the early retirement. For husband, his are a bit higher, but he went from bachelor apartment to 2 bedroom, while I went from house to apartment. 

So you might have to work a bit longer if you marry, but it shouldn't change things that much for you. The problems would be if she insisted on completely joint or had a big problem with you not working while she was. H and I agree that as long as the other person is still contributing their 50%, they can work or not work as they see fit. We're still in the accumulation phase though, both reasonably healthy and with similar income potentials, so that helps.


----------



## greeneyeddolphin (May 31, 2010)

We have completely combined finances, it's what works for us, for various reasons, one of which being that he works over the road and this is easier than him trying to find time to transfer money to a joint account so I can make sure the bills get paid. 

However, when we first began discussing living together and finances, a method he had used in the past was to have separate accounts as well as a joint account. Each person would contribute to the joint account based on what was needed to pay the bills and their income. I don't remember exactly how it worked exactly, but it was something along the lines of each person contributed X% of their income, to total up to the amount needed to pay the bills. That way, they had a joint account to pay for bills, groceries, household stuff, etc., and it made them each feel more secure in the financial aspect of the relationship, but they also still had their own accounts with their own money to spend or save as they saw fit. 

We don't bother with that, because we both are pretty much the same when it comes to money, and given his job, it's easier for me to handle the money anyway, so it's just easier to have one account that we both access. 

You might consider the combo of joint and separate accounts. 

Another thing that you might consider is that you are using finances as an excuse. I'm not saying that your concerns aren't valid, but perhaps the truth is that you really aren't all that sure you want to marry her and so you are using the finances as your reason to hold off. For most people, if they really love someone and want to marry and spend their life with that person, this might be a concern but they would be eagerly making suggestions, even ridiculous ones, on how they might make it work. You're not exactly shooting down everyone's suggestions, but you don't seem to be looking at any of them as valid options, saying "You know, that might work...I need to think on that one a bit." So I would give some thought to the idea that although this is a valid concern, that maybe the reality is not so much that you are worried about combining finances but that you aren't all that confident in wanting to spend your life with her. Especially since you mention the relationship might be breaking down...if you're feeling that way, I'm guessing you're (even subconsciously) looking for excuses. 

How long have you been together? I don't see where you mention that, and I have to wonder if perhaps that's a factor, too. Maybe you haven't been together too long and you're feeling pressured to make a commitment you're not ready to make. Or maybe you've been together long enough that you know you don't want to marry her but you don't want to leave because of comfort, familiarity, habit, etc. And so again...a valid concern becomes a seemingly impossible to overcome excuse.


----------



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

takris said:


> The only thing that keeps them there are the intangibles, the lifestyle available with merging incomes and financial security. You're removing a couple of these, in a sense.


I am glad I would drive away such women. I certainly would not want a woman who primarily wants me for better lifestyle with merged incomes / financial security. (I believe the term is a gold-digger?) Having said that, clearly she would be better off with me financially in that her expenses would be lower due the many shared expenses, tax advantages, etc. plus if something did happen to her, she would have me worrying about her financially and non-financially as well. But while this is an "improvement" in her financial security, I'd rather stay alone than be with someone who wants me primarily for financial support...



SimplyAmorous said:


> It really does come down to what YOU want MORE >> is retiring more important to you or this woman and your Love for her , a marraige ?? Money or companionship.


I am afraid most of what you said is correct (I picked just the main question in the quote). So far that's the choice - companionship + go off to work or the "care-free" single life (at least for now)



Chelhxi said:


> So, could you compromise on having joint and separate accounts? You both agree what $ or % you both contribute to the joint household and then do what you will with the remainder?


Yes, that's exactly what I proposed and what she does not like - she wants everything combined rather than sharing the expenses for household and leaving the rest to each person. I am completely on board with what you and your H are doing. As you said though "the problems would be if she insisted on completely joint or had a big problem with you not working while she was", which is where I am. (To answer your other question, we are not living together.)

@atruckersgirl: Having separate accounts and a joint one for household expenses was my suggestion. As for this being an excuse, I don't know - things were going well until the issue was brought up. I don't know what you mean by me not looking at suggestions as valid options? So far there were suggestions to just go ahead and forget my financial goals or to do the separate account thing + joint for household expenses. I am having difficulty with the former, and she has difficulty with the latter... I am all ears for more suggestions 

The only pressure I feel regarding commitment is of my own making, not from her at all. I am trying to decide for myself if I need to move on and try to find someone more compatible (or even stay alone), or try to make this work in some way. Both options right now seem very hard to do...

Appreciate all the responses.


----------



## Chelhxi (Oct 30, 2008)

I've still been thinking about this and I think you really need to know (if you don't already) the REASON she wants everything combined. This could take many not-so-fun conversions. She might not even know her own reasons and it could be hard to get to the bottom line.
Here are some examples of reasons she might want only combined money:
- "that's just the way it's done"
- parents did it that way
- she thinks combined = you less likely to divorce her
- she wants to keep her options open re: divorcing you and taking your money
- feels anything else isn't the level of commitment that she wants
- she wants to work less (no kids)
- she wants to stay home with kids while you work
- she wants to feel richer
- she wants to spend your money

Lots of other stuff, too I'm sure. There are just so many reasons, and some are red flags and some are just differences of opinion and emotional hot-points that everyone has. Sounds like you need lots of conversations. 

Have you discussed other stuff like kids or not? What if there was an unplanned pregnancy? Who would manage the money if kept jointly and what type of rules? Pre-nup? Merging households?


----------



## takris (Sep 22, 2010)

It's a good thing that you are honest with yourself and know yourself. Prevents alot of heartache in the future. I could also retire soon, but choose a different path, yet still can understand and respect this.  

I'm in a career program for people identified as future leaders of the company I work for, and its nice that my wife can care less about the financial prospects. Its probably one of the reasons we're still together.


----------



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

Chelhxi said:


> I think you really need to know (if you don't already) the REASON she wants everything combined.


Some of the reasons you mention most people would probably NOT admit to anyway (e.g. "I want to spend your money")... I truly think her reasons are the following based on earlier conversations:
- "That's just the way it's done. Our parents did it this way. Everyone I know did it this way."
- "It's our money together. Not yours or mine."
- she has personal experience with combining money with someone and they supported each other at different times as needed 
- she wants to stay home with kids for some time (don't know exactly how long). I am fine with this one and can work longer for it.

Some of your other questions:
- yes, kids would be good
- pre-nup was not discussed - what's the point if she feels everything has to be combined anyway? I don't think we are at the point of discussing pre-nups for "bad futures" if we can't agree yet on the "good future"
- rules for managing money - she believes we will just decide together on what's reasonable to spend and go with that adapting as needed.


----------



## greeneyeddolphin (May 31, 2010)

What I meant by not considering them valid options was...well, I guess I was trying to say that if you truly loved her and really wanted to marry her and had no doubts, you would consider working longer, or other options, as options because you love her and you want to be with her. Or you would feel that you could tell her you wanted separate finances without fear or her anger or whatever. If that makes sense. 

It's kind of like...well, my boyfriend is the only one who works in our relationship. I stay home with the kids. Although this was not necessarily what I was looking for, I love the situation as it is, as does he. But, if he came to me and told me that he didn't want to be the sole income anymore and wanted me to work, although I would be somewhat disappointed, I would go back to work because it would make him happy, instead of going looking for someone else who might let me stay home with the kids. And I'd rather be with him in a less than ideal situation than with anyone else in an perfect circumstance. 

I don't know if I'm making sense or not here. I've been up with the kids very early the last couple of days, and I stay up way too late at night. So my brain may have gone on vacation and I'm speaking gibberish here.  Please don't hold it against me.


----------



## lime (Jul 3, 2010)

It's interesting that you're ok with her staying at home with the kids, but not ok with sharing money? How will she have enough to retire if she's home with the kids, not working? How will she buy groceries--will you just have a separate checking account for her that you put a little money in each week? I'm just confused as to how that situation would work. 

Also I'm interested in your attitude towards working--do you enjoy your job? Or do you view it as simply a way to make money so that you can do other things you enjoy? Do you find it fulfilling? Like atruckersgirl said, you would consider other options if you had no doubts about wanting to marry her. To me, it seems like you are happy with the relationship, but perhaps you hate working more than you love her? If you are so keen on retiring early, it feels like your job must be pretty stressful or demanding or just downright awful. Can you not cut back to part-time?


----------



## lime (Jul 3, 2010)

Oh yea--and if you want one parent home with the kids, couldn't you stay home if you're going to be retired? Or does she want to be the one to stay home?


----------



## Ironsides (Nov 15, 2010)

Justin123 said:


> I can't come up with a good way of combining money in this situation in such a way that she would not feel resentful that I am not working and I would not feel guilty for enjoying the product of my labor, which I certainly plan on doing if I remain single...
> 
> What do you think?


I feel like a lot of comments in these kinds of forums tend to get off topic, so I will just try to directly answer your question as you asked it.

My advice is that you quit your current job and find another that you find more bearable, and maybe even enjoy.

This will keep you out of the house, preventing some of the "I work all day and all you do is golf" resentment that you might otherwise face.

This job will keep you occupied 20-30 hours per week so you continue to appreciate your hobbies and leisure as much as you do now. Full-time leisure sounds great, and it sounds like you've done your share of hard work in your life, but I know at least for me my free time is all the sweeter if I have some work to compare it to.

The job will also provide you with an income. You mentioned that your interest income stream will be small, so presumably a part-time, mostly-for-fun job will give you enough income to match that interest income and thus cover your expenses.

You can then either allow your savings to compound or use the interest to make worthy investments or purchases, like saving for your kids' college education, supporting your wife when she stays at home, or subsidizing your wife's retirement savings so you can _both_ retire a little earlier.

Since you are clearly a smart guy and have planned well financially so far, I assume you are making responsible and smart choices about what your "expenses" include. Hopefully they include your share of the mortgage, utilities, kids' college savings, etc. Make sure you discuss these with your partner and that you both have realistic expectations.

You mentioned that your hobbies are not employable, but I'm sure there are some professions that you could get something in related fields. Like cars? Sell them or write freelance for a car magazine. Like reading? Work in a book shop. Just be creative. Now is the time to look at all those jobs you thought were stupid in high school because you wouldn't make any money, even if they were fun. You can even start your own business in a field you love, but this is obviously financially riskier and more stressful.

If you don't hate the content of your current job, just its rat race aspect, consider doing the same kind of work as a consultant or for a smaller, lower pressure company. If you are an accountant, for instance, consider doing accounting for a local start up part-time. This will get you near-career hourly wage rates with much lower stress.

You could even work for a charity, trading lower pay for more good feelings, less resentment from partner about working part-time, and very low stress levels. 

You could even work for a company involved in a hobby of yours, or even a charity involved in a hobby of yours for the best of all worlds.

But the most important thing is to be clear, honest, and open with your partner. You are perfectly justified in wanting to enjoy the fruits of your labor, but marriage is in large part about compromise. In contrast to what some people will want you to believe, "compromise" does _not_ mean "give up your financially-oriented hopes and dreams for an idealized version of a 1950s style touchy-feely family." You should want to have a happy family and to make your partner feel loved and truly a partner, but it's okay to want to not have to work so darn hard anymore. I think the solution I put above will let you accomplish both, but you need to make sure you two are both okay with it. Think about what truly makes you both happy, and do your best to achieve that for each other.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

J,
This "can" work but only if BOTH of you are willing to change your mindsets a LOT. While its true opposites attract, they often make each other miserable. 

Does she expect her standard of living to change once you two are married? If so, how? How would she feel about a budget that creates a high savings rate? 

By the way the whole "we should do it because everyone else does" is a totally flawed argument. 
1. Prior generations had lower divorce rates and frankly the "modern" woman has MUCH higher relationship expectations than her mother did. 
2. People very often make specific financial agreements prior to marriage when one of them has much more money.

Do NOT underestimate the fact that she may "love you" but not be "in love with you". Some women can really make that work. My mother did. She loved Dad and so she made the effort to be a good wife. And vice versa. In todays world many many women see sex as totally optional in their marriage. Are you going to be ok with that? Meaning a scenario where she turns into a massively expensive roommate. 

BTW - I would say the exact same thing were you a woman and she a man. Women sometimes marry the "financially safe" guy, proceed to get bored and restless and ....no sex....well at least not for you - and a marked lack of respect in general. 

By the way if you don't understand the clear link between sex and money you should think about it for a while. 

My W and I are together 21 years. We had some tough situations that got resolved nicely - but the glue during those times was largely "money that I provided" and "sex that she provided". We were both generous with what we gave. 




Justin123 said:


> Some of the reasons you mention most people would probably NOT admit to anyway (e.g. "I want to spend your money")... I truly think her reasons are the following based on earlier conversations:
> - "That's just the way it's done. Our parents did it this way. Everyone I know did it this way."
> - "It's our money together. Not yours or mine."
> - she has personal experience with combining money with someone and they supported each other at different times as needed
> ...


----------



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

@lime: let me clarify about me being OK with her staying with the kids (say for a year?) - what I meant was I would be ok to pay to the joint account 100% during that time. After that, I could clearly take on more of baby-sitting responsibilities, e.g. while she is at work... Maybe if baby-sitting turns out too hard, I'll be happy to have a job?  Or, we could hire a baby-sitter just like any other family, depending on how things are going by that time. As for groceries and other shared expenses, that's easy - joint account for shared expenses will be used for any such payments. 

@Ironsides: thank you for your thorough response. I feel I may have to think hard about it, even though I'd rather not look for this kind of work (well, I don't mind looking, I just could not think of a satisfying job so far, which could come close to me enjoying my hobbies)... 2 comments:
- it's not that easy to find a job related to the hobbies - e.g. in your reading example - yes, one of my hobbies is to read, but realistically, noone will pay me to sit at the bookstore to read, I'd rather read at home or outside and not in a bookstore, and finally, I am not interested in any other bookstore "job" aspects... So even though the two are related, one is job to get money and the other is really what I would have liked to do instead... I come to the same kind of comparison for my other hobbies.
- even if I did find some part-time enjoyable work, same question remains with her potentially feeling / thinking "why he is working few hours a week for this small-pay job and having fun, while I work my butt off at this hard job"?... assuming the money is combined / all ours / etc...

@MEM11363: If I were shopping just for sex, I could find it much cheaper than 10-15 years worth of work. So, if I follow what you are saying, no, I don't believe sex is the main reason to get married. At least not for me.


----------



## lime (Jul 3, 2010)

Justin123 said:


> @lime: let me clarify about me being OK with her staying with the kids (say for a year?) - what I meant was I would be ok to pay to the joint account 100% during that time. After that, I could clearly take on more of baby-sitting responsibilities, e.g. while she is at work... Maybe if baby-sitting turns out too hard, I'll be happy to have a job?  Or, we could hire a baby-sitter just like any other family, depending on how things are going by that time. As for groceries and other shared expenses, that's easy - joint account for shared expenses will be used for any such payments.


This makes sense to me now. The only thing would be that if she wanted to stay home for more than 1 year, she would be sacrificing the ability to put money into her retirement account (and any employer match programs) so that might be something else you would need to help with--or she would have to work that much longer before retiring. If you were to stay at home with the kids--and we already know you're not a traditionalist --there wouldn't be this weird issue.

You didn't answer my other questions about your happiness with your current job--do you really hate it? Or do you just really value your free time? Do you view your job as fulfilling, or just a way to make money to fund other fulfilling things that you enjoy? Also, out of curiosity, what are your hobbies?

Like others have said, you're not following the typical "man provides" kind of scenario and I think that's ok. But what I really just don't know after looking over this stuff again is whether or not you've talked to your partner about this? Have you mentioned you want to retire early and live off of your interest and not work? Is she ok with that? So far it just seems like you're worried that she will feel jealous of you sitting around all day. But you need to actually talk to her if you haven't already--she could feel this way, OR she might be 100% on board with you not working. If she's ok with the setup (you contribute whatever interest you earn, while she contributes her income minus her own retirement savings), then I don't see what's so wrong with having joint everything. As long as she respects the budget you have set up for yourself, everything should work out. It should work out too if you have separate everything, but I feel like sharing engenders more trust and more responsibility--that's just a personal opinion though.

Have you planned for college for potential kids? How would you be paying for that--do you have enough savings or would you rely on your future wife to save for them? Or make them pay on their own? Unfortunately, not working means that you'll either need savings, or you'll have to dip into your retirement which will really hurt the interest.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

J,
I have no desire to offend you - simply suggest you ask yourself a question. Do you have some idea how much she is into you - separate from the financial security you offer. 

As for sex - well it is strikingly similar in many regards to money. When there is a plentiful supply of it and when your higher income partner is generous in how they share, it is a non-issue. When in tight supply or when you feel your partner is being "controlling/cheap" it becomes a constant source of friction. Which is why financial issues are the largest single cause of divorce.

Same thing with sex. There is a reason for the saying: "when it is good, sex is 10% of the relationship - when it is bad it becomes 90% of the relationship. 

One thing is almost a certainty. Unless a woman is totally in love with you - just you - not you as a provider - there is no chance in hell of a marriage surviving where the operating model is you are mostly/totally retired and she is working full time for a decade or two. She will resent you and it will eat away at the marriage like acid. 

While it may be possible for you to find someone who is so crazy about you that they will be happy supporting your "plan"
she clearly doesn't fall into that category based on her comments to date. 

In fact she may secretly hope that after having a child or two she can persuade you to work full time while she raises them full time and does not work outside the home. 

As for how she treats you - be very, very observant. She is in the process of negotiating the rest of her life. If she is a very direct person - like my W is - what you get now will be what you get after the wedding. If however she is not so direct you may find that her post wedding behavior slowly and steadily changes in a manner that you are surprised by. A lot of that may be driven by how her parents interact/ed and how she believes a marriage "should" work. 

If her parents have a happy, mutually respectful marriage that is a good sign. 




Justin123 said:


> @lime: let me clarify about me being OK with her staying with the kids (say for a year?) - what I meant was I would be ok to pay to the joint account 100% during that time. After that, I could clearly take on more of baby-sitting responsibilities, e.g. while she is at work... Maybe if baby-sitting turns out too hard, I'll be happy to have a job?  Or, we could hire a baby-sitter just like any other family, depending on how things are going by that time. As for groceries and other shared expenses, that's easy - joint account for shared expenses will be used for any such payments.
> 
> @Ironsides: thank you for your thorough response. I feel I may have to think hard about it, even though I'd rather not look for this kind of work (well, I don't mind looking, I just could not think of a satisfying job so far, which could come close to me enjoying my hobbies)... 2 comments:
> - it's not that easy to find a job related to the hobbies - e.g. in your reading example - yes, one of my hobbies is to read, but realistically, noone will pay me to sit at the bookstore to read, I'd rather read at home or outside and not in a bookstore, and finally, I am not interested in any other bookstore "job" aspects... So even though the two are related, one is job to get money and the other is really what I would have liked to do instead... I come to the same kind of comparison for my other hobbies.
> ...


----------



## Justin123 (Nov 13, 2010)

lime said:


> If she's ok with the setup (you contribute whatever interest you earn, while she contributes her income minus her own retirement savings), then I don't see what's so wrong with having joint everything.


I am not sure I follow this, and I would really like to understand the sentence above! If everything is combined, then there is no longer interest that "I" earn, it's only interest that "WE" earn. It would be impossible to separate interest coming from my money vs hers because it would all be mixed. So, I don't see how I could then claim or view which part of interest is attributed to me, thus allowing me to not work.... ??? 

I realize I did not answer some of your questions - it's because I don't want to get off topic here, which would be too easy to do. That's why I don't go into what my hobbies are or whether I hate my job or just like not having it that much more - either way, I clearly have a strong preference for not working over working  (plus it is possible that it would be harder for me to even have work later on due to my kind of work potentially going overseas - but again, I'd rather not get side-tracked)

I talked to her about my plans to a degree, but I don't think she believed me I could do this, and in any case she is kind of stuck on the concept of NOT combining everything.

And yes, I also understand that the plan assumes I will take care of my half of all expenses, including kids college, etc. 

@MEM11363: You did not offend me. Yes, I think she is into me, but I suppose there is a chance I could be wrong too, given these latest discussions.


----------



## lime (Jul 3, 2010)

Justin123 said:


> I am not sure I follow this, and I would really like to understand the sentence above! If everything is combined, then there is no longer interest that "I" earn, it's only interest that "WE" earn. It would be impossible to separate interest coming from my money vs hers because it would all be mixed. So, I don't see how I could then claim or view which part of interest is attributed to me, thus allowing me to not work.... ???


Right, I think what I meant was, YES the interest is what the both of you will earn if you put the account under two names. And that gets thrown into the pot along with the income from her job, which also is shared completely between the two of you. She won't marry you and all of a sudden think, "Hey! Now I'm contributing half of that interest, because half of those savings are mine!" (at least I hope she won't think that way! She didn't earn all that money in the first place, and she will remember that you contributed all those savings to the marriage). The more logical line of thought is, "Hey! Now my husband is sharing his hard-earned savings with me, and the interest earned helps us support ourselves. I am so appreciative that he worked so hard!" Obviously you will need to talk to her to see what she actually thinks. If you're hung up on the fact that they will be her savings too, just remember that each of you makes a contribution to the marriage: she brings money in every month (that becomes money for the BOTH of you immediately!) while you brought in a lot of money right at the beginning of the marriage, whose interest is technically still "your" contribution each month.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

Very interesting thread.
If it were me I would stick to my plan of retireing early and if she was a ***** about it then I would look for someone else that was like minded in regards to finanical security.

Time is the most valuable asset we have and if you can retire early and have more time for family and hobbies then I say go for it.

sounds like she will be resentfull if you do.

It seems to me that she might have an idea that she should stay home and you should continue to work and suport a family. some women have the idea of whats yours is mine and whats mine is mine.

I'd look for someone else this sound like a warning flag to me.

If it walks like a duck then most likley it a duck!!!!!!!!!!

I think she should be happy for you and maybe come up with a game plan to save really hard so you both could retier early.You might have to work a little longer but it would be worth it if she balks at that idea then you to are not a very good match in regards to money


----------

