Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 8, 2016 19:21:47 GMT -5
Well I certainly don't think the prom should be "the best night of my daughter life". But I do want her to look and feel beautiful It is different around here. The kids that can afford to go all out do, and the ones that can't dont. I can afford it so I plan on buying my daughter a nice dress. My mom couldn't afford it so I worked and bought my own dress. I didn't want to look like the poor girl from PIP...Ii would have sooner stayed home! I've always loved to dress up so I don't get the hate on the prom. I don't hate on prom...I just thought it was stupid. I just don't get the "Omg, you can't skip prom! It's a right of passage and you'll regret it later in life", thing that gets thrown around all the time. I was showing horses back then and spent a crap ton of money there, way more than a prom dress, so it's not the money aspect. Gotcha. I loved prom and everything that went with it (except the fact that I took my ex husband!lol). I don't understand not wanting to go but I respect that we are all different with different priorities. My daughter is me reincarnated so she loves that kind of stuff. Im happy that I can afford for her to go....she isnt as YM as me so the concept of her buying her own dress would be foreign to her!lol
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Feb 8, 2016 19:35:12 GMT -5
You make it sound like there have been a lot of boy friends paying 1/2 rent, 1/2 utilities and extras lol Just a couple, but really my point was that many boyfriends pay for extras because they love their women and want to treat them. Paying rent does not automatically excuse you from paying for extras nor does it validate not paying living expenses. In my opinion, it shouldn't be one or the other. Although dinner and vacations is one thing, summer camp and prom dresses is another. Beergut pays for all their groceries, which with 3 growing teenagers in the house, is not an inconsiderable amount. My sister has 4 kids, and her grocery bill runs well over $1200/mo. So in reality, he is very likely paying MORE than what he'd be paying for 'rent and utilities' if he paid it to his g/f directly for his share of living there and her buying the groceries instead. It's just math. I'm not seeing how him paying her a set amount each month changes anything, especially if he is doing the lion's share of the cooking (and in past threads where he's been posting recipes, it sounds like he is), therefore it makes sense that he does most of the grocery buying. The problem is the expectations that on top of paying groceries, he is expected to foot the bill on any extras for the kids that the g/f and her ex should be footing. If he wants to contribute, that's fine. But it's the expectation that he's automatically going to pay for the wants of the kids when the bank of mom and dad is empty.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 14:33:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2016 19:43:19 GMT -5
Him paying her a set amount each month means SHE gets to be in charge of some of her money decisions.
Food is a variable expense. I think we have shown on this board that there is great variability in what to spend for food. I have given the example of when I was first out of college and living with a boyfriend... I spent lots of time with advertizements, shopping sales, clipping coupons. I could easily feed us for more than a week on 50$... Then he would buy some steaks for 50$ that was 2 meals maybe, but it was 'equal'.... No one knows how much she was spending on food before beer, and whether or not his contributions there are 'fair share' overall or not. Plus, it is something which can be manipulated in order to spend money elsewhere if desired. If she had a set sum, she could make that decision. As is she has no control.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 8, 2016 19:58:09 GMT -5
Him paying her a set amount each month means SHE gets to be in charge of some of her money decisions. Food is a variable expense. I think we have shown on this board that there is great variability in what to spend for food. I have given the example of when I was first out of college and icing with a boyfriend... I spent lots of time with advertizements, shopping sales, clipping coupons. I could easily feed us for more than a week on 50$... Then he would buy some steaks for 50$ that was 2 meals maybe, but it was 'equal'.... No one knows how much she was spending on food before beer, and whether or not his contributions there are 'fair share' overall or not. Plus, it is something which can be manipulated in order to spend money elsewhere if desired. If she had a set sum, she could make that decision. As is she has no control. Exactly. Food is a place that some people economize and others splurge. But an even larger problem when it comes to their money dynamic is that once again, it's Beer making the decisions on all discretionary items and choosing the ones that give him personal fulfillment and even a bit of glory. He likes to cook - it gives him enjoyment - so he chooses to spend on it. He can make the favorite dishes of some of the family or show off his skills. Again, a form of control. Trust me, as a mom and as someone who does most of the cooking in our house being the one who buys the food and does the cooking is a form of control and can even be used as a way to get attention, convey or even withhold affection. Nobody appreciates it when you spend $2000 on the mortgage to pay for the room they sleep in or pay for the $250 electric bill that keeps the lights on, but make their favorite roast chicken and homemade mashed potatoes for $15 and the kids heap adulation on you like you're royalty.
Part of being a team of grown ups is that each of the grown ups should take on a share of the icky household stuff and each should take on a share of the enjoyable household stuff. Beer chooses to skim off the more enjoyable stuff, leaving GF with the icky stuff. Not nice.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:01:05 GMT -5
17 yr old is dress shopping. The dress she wants is $460, so over $500 with tax. Is this normal? It sounds to me like they are preparing these girls for the racket that is the wedding industry. "They" aren't doing anything. Those who decide to purchase are the ones to look at. Does this 17 year old have a PT job or savings from a summer job? What would you like her to contribute if anything at all? I would look at some of the consignment shops or even ebay if you want to get the cost down. Sit down and talk to your daughter so that each of you can fully understand the expectations that each has. She has blown all of her saving from her Summer job, as well as any money she received for Christmas. I advocated her getting a part-time job, but she claims she "doesn't have time" because of the extra-curricular activities she is involved in. Since she "doesn't have time", she is making the decision to not have that extra money, which is fine by me. I've already decided I'm not contributing anything. She, her mother, and bio-dad will have to figure it out.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:05:08 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, are they weddings for your friends and family? Or hers? I also thought she she took out a loan for the car? Two weddings are my friends, one wedding is one of her friends. She doesn't have to go to either of the weddings for my friends, but I'm part of the wedding party for one, and it is a destination wedding, so she wants to go to that one. Different car. She bought a car in late December, I gave her the money for the down payment. The car I bought is a beater that is a daily driver for me.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:13:52 GMT -5
Wild guess - but he's not talking about the car she bought a few months ago. I'm betting he just bought himself a new car. But since GF and kids will get to ride in it and maybe even drive it sometimes, it's totally for their benefit and counts as his contribution to the household. I love how you just automatically assume the worst about me I'm not a car person. The "new" car I just bought is a 2000 Toyota Corolla with 140k miles on it. I bought it because I couldn't come to an agreement with the dealer on the car I had my eye on (a low mileage 2003 Toyota Avalon). This is a beater for me to drive around for a year or two while I try to find another car with low mileage for me to make my daily driver. My daily driver for the last 8-9 months has been a 2006 Nissan Sentra which is now the daily driver of the 16 year old, who just passed her driving test last week. The Sentra was purchased with the intent of being the 16 year old's daily driver once she received her license. I don't think the kids or GF will ever ride in the Corolla, GF and 16 YO enjoy driving their cars too much.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:17:46 GMT -5
Maybe he gave someone in the house his old one? If a car title was actually signed over to someone else in the house, that would be a contribution. If not... If you sign over a car title to a 16 year old, you're an idiot. The first time you get into a heated argument and they leave taking the car, you have no way of tracking them down. If they get the brilliant idea of selling the car to finance something else they want, you have no way to stop them.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:20:57 GMT -5
My experience is people with less means often spend more on Prom and HS grad than people with more money. My read is that HS grad is a bigger deal to them in their family and experience. I always expected my kids to go to college and graduate with at least a BA. So it wouldn't occur to me to spend a thousand or more on a prom. But if I was from a family where a HS graduation was the highest goal achieved or worse often not achieved at all maybe I would spend a shit load of money on it thinking it was the biggest deal of their lives so far. PS sorry for the super long run on sentence at the end. I'm just to tired today to fix it. While I'm sure you're right (and the post further down links to evidence that you are), that isn't the case here. GF's father graduated from college, both she and her brother are college graduates, and all three kids are expected to go to and graduate from college. High school graduation is not a big deal, it is an expectation. Household income surely doesn't qualify us as 'poor'.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:27:08 GMT -5
Beer, I really don't like how she talks to you. She clearly doesn't get it and she doesn't respect the situation you are in, or your pocket book. Your situation is complicated enough without always being made the bad guy. I really, really think you need counseling with her, or a financial planning heart-to-heart, or something. Of course, I was brought up that you don't ask anyone for anything so I may be overly harsh, but the very least that she could do would be to present the situation in a calm and logical manner as opposed to angry. That is what I sense in her tone is anger. Maybe that's not how it really is; but that how it comes across to me in your posts. The funny thing is, I told my brother about the conversation we had, and he almost choked. He told me what GF said was very similar to what his now ex-wife used to say when they'd have arguments about money. My former SIL was always obsessed with making more money than my brother, because she felt if she did that, then she'd have the power over financial decisions, and she'd get to 'punish' him (as she felt he was 'punishing' her by saying 'no'). And GF was pissed when she said that, what you sense about her tone is correct.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:34:46 GMT -5
I suspect that she'll be rethinking her position once he tells her no on the $500. That would mean that not only is he not paying rent, but now he's going to reneg on the "extras" too. What exactly is he contributing then? I think you're right. It seems that OP is looking for outside opinion to justify contributing less and less overall. And - everyone would totally support him 100% if they didn't know the back story - which, IIRC - was very slow in being revealed, and only after much questioning. You live with someone, both are working, everyone assumes you are paying rent and utilities and then you complain about paying 100% for a vacay and not-your-kid's camp, and everyone is on your side - you are doing so much for them, they are ungrateful, etc. etc. A bit dishonest if you are keeping it quiet that you are not paying rent or bills, etc. I'm not looking for an outside opinion to justify anything. And I wasn't complaining about paying 100% for a vacation or the camp for the kids, my frustration in that situation was that two of the kids were at camp, and GF wanted to go and take a vacation that week with the third kid so he 'wouldn't feel left out'. I said no because we couldn't afford it, and because I was already committed to doing dog-sitting for relatives that week. She decides to go ahead anyway, then calls me twice during the week needing money, because she ran over budget/ran out of money. That post wasn't me complaining about sending the kids to camp (which I was happy to do), it was me expressing frustration that I was right, and it cost me money.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:42:40 GMT -5
Well, what kind of extras every month? If he is consistently paying for things like going out to eat, movies, games, ect... Do they add up to near the amount she pays for the non fun stuff? If so I think it's unreasonable to then have him pay for a $500 dress because it will be much more than that, shoes, hair, whatever else... That's asking an awful lot. She needs a budget for sure. Movies, games, eating out, internet access, club sports fees, gas money occasionally. I have sat down and figured out what is the lowest amount of money I have spent on them in any given month since I moved in. It was $2000, which is more than the mortgage payment, plus utilities, cable, internet, and water combined. It is also over 3X what my monthly expenses were when I lived alone in an apartment. BUT, because I don't pay half the mortgage and 25% of the utilities in a direct payment to GF, I don't pay my 'fair share', according to many on here.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 2:57:40 GMT -5
Beer refuses to consider a monthly contribution until she reveals a very detailed budget. It is only at that point he will consider what a fair contribution should be. I strongly disagree that she needs to show her complete and detailed financial picture for him to know what fair market value is to rent a house in her neighborhood (and divide in half as he is 1/2 of the adults in the house) and whatever they think is fair for utilities- I would again say half. One could definitely argue that he shouldn't have to pay half, but if it weren't her house and they found a house together to rent- I bet it would be split evenly. There is no possible way anybody who was receiving nothing wouldn't find this agreeable. Which, is why I suspect beer wouldn't offer anything nearly as fair. For whatever reason, she hasn't handed over the requested budget. Maybe she doesn't have one that meets his requirements. She claims to have a budget, but she doesn't. I discovered this when she told me she mixed up some of the bills, and forgot to pay a bill, so a monthly service was shut off. If she had a budget on a spreadsheet at work, as she claims, I don't see how you can mix up bills as you go down the line and pay them and check them off. It also explains why she keeps 'forgetting' to bring home the spreadsheet. The problem with your "he should pay half because he is 1/2 the adults in the household" is that there are 5 people in the household. Paying for the other 3 is the responsibility of GF and the bio-dad. If I take on 1/2 of all of the bills, I am essentially letting bio-dad off the hook for being a deadbeat. How is that fair to me?
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 3:12:33 GMT -5
If you have read many of OP topics and posts, you may remember that most of the time what beer talks about is "I" "I" "Me" "Me".......he's the Daddy of the entire household, and he loves every minute of it. I said once he is a control freak, and they way he does it is control with money. It was him that took 1 of the daughters to the bank to open an account (one that he wanted her to have) same with buying DD a car, it was what he wanted for her, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts or withholds money.
Oh, the drama of a dysfunctional relationship, too bad the 3 kids have been drawn into it. I really wish there was a way for us to mark a thread so if we don't want certain people to reply to it, they can be blocked, because your responses to any threads about this topic often add nothing, and do more harm than good. For the record, I took the 17 YO to the bank to open an account at her mother's request, because she didn't like the set-up for student accounts at her personal bank. I also took the 16 YO to the bank and set up an account for her for the same reason. It has nothing to do with 'control', it has to do with me doing something easy for the girls that GF asked me to do. As for the car, I offered to 'help' with procuring a car for the 16 YO when she turned 15, not realizing at the time I made the offer that 'help' meant paying for the whole thing. I keep my word when I promise I will do something, so I bit the bullet and paid for the car. This isn't about 'control' or 'pouting' because I don't get my way, but I realize the truth has no place in your narrative. Your responses contribute nothing to any threads I post, so in the future, kindly ignore and do not reply to any threads I start.
|
|
gooddecisions
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:42:28 GMT -5
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by gooddecisions on Feb 9, 2016 3:29:00 GMT -5
Thanks for coming back. I can't say I would have blamed you for peacing out on this thread.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 9, 2016 6:57:40 GMT -5
Wild guess - but he's not talking about the car she bought a few months ago. I'm betting he just bought himself a new car. But since GF and kids will get to ride in it and maybe even drive it sometimes, it's totally for their benefit and counts as his contribution to the household. I love how you just automatically assume the worst about me Well all we have to go on is what you post...
And my assumption was correct here. You didn't buy a car for the family, you bought one for yourself. To summarize, the bank of Beer is closed because you just bought yourself a car (and are allowing one of the family to drive your old car w/approx. 200k miles on it but which you still own) and you plan to take three trips in the future - two for weddings of your friends and one for the wedding of your GF's friend.
The reason people assume that you may be omitting facts to make yourself look good is that you seem to do that with regularity. This is another example. You post something that makes it sound like you're contributing thousands to the family in purchasing a car for another family member and then taking them on 3 future trips. But when we dig a little, the car was purchased for you (and it's nice that you let one of the family drive your old beater but you still own it, it wasn't a gift to the family it still belongs to you so the "value" of what you've given the family is the value of each of the times the 16 year old drives it, not the value of the car) and two of the trips are for your benefit, not the benefit of the family. It's not clear if you misstate things on purpose to make yourself look good or if you're really this unaware of how selfish many of your actions are, but in either case it means people are hesitant to take your statements about your actions at face value.
Now you're posting that you contribute $2k a month to the family. You may have spent $2k, but it's reasonable to assume that your GF may not agree that all the spending was "for the family".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 14:33:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 8:10:55 GMT -5
Well, what kind of extras every month? If he is consistently paying for things like going out to eat, movies, games, ect... Do they add up to near the amount she pays for the non fun stuff? If so I think it's unreasonable to then have him pay for a $500 dress because it will be much more than that, shoes, hair, whatever else... That's asking an awful lot. She needs a budget for sure. Movies, games, eating out, internet access, club sports fees, gas money occasionally. I have sat down and figured out what is the lowest amount of money I have spent on them in any given month since I moved in. It was $2000, which is more than the mortgage payment, plus utilities, cable, internet, and water combined. It is also over 3X what my monthly expenses were when I lived alone in an apartment. BUT, because I don't pay half the mortgage and 25% of the utilities in a direct payment to GF, I don't pay my 'fair share', according to many on here. If you are spending $2000 a month on what is primarily entertainment (your list above), you need a budget as much as your girlfriend does. I imagine, however, that you are also including groceries because I can't imagine how someone of ordinary means would spend $2000 on what you listed. But be honest . . . are you really cooking for the whole family every night? Those are some unusual teen-aged kids if they are eating at home very much; they are usually busy with practices, school activities, and hanging out. And teens aren't that big into leftovers. They would rather just grab something. They are also unusual teens if they would be caught dead going to the movies with the "family." Counting what really are personal expenses . . . the food you choose to cook and eat, the dating expenses you would pay, anyway, regardless of whether you lived with your girlfriend or not, the internet that I bet you would pay for if it was just you, yourself, and you . . . is really misleading in trying to get a picture of who pays what in the household. Cut through all the crap you get from us, and focus on this: If you and your girlfriend were happy with this arrangement, then you wouldn't be having fights about it and you wouldn't be posting on here. You don't really like how money is handled in the household. What are your choices? - Break up with her?
- Move out but continue dating?
- Stay but continue complaining?
- Stay but accept the situation?
- Stay and discuss it together?
You need to decide what you want to do. What you are doing right now isn't fair to you or your girlfriend. You are just doing the same things over and over, ingraining a pattern that you will never break out of. Good luck with what you decide to do. I mean that sincerely.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Feb 9, 2016 8:31:44 GMT -5
To SS' post. If GF's financial life doesn't meet your criteria, and if you refuse to marry her until it does, and she isn't making changes, and you're unhappy with the constant requests to contribute to the household you are living in but not contributing to in any reliable way, then why are you still there? Certainly, you can get nookie without being part of a household. I think it's very difficult to build a relationship with someone who has children and not expect to contribute toward the expense of those children from time to time. Yes, a parent should strive to cover his/her own children's needs. But, if one enters a relationship with a parent with eyes wide open and with full knowledge that children come with the package, and then joins the parent and children in their home, then one must either set reasonable and reliable financial contributions from the start, or accept the consequences. I'm not suggesting you replace the bio father's financial obligations, but you seem to want all of the benefits of the relationship with GF and her ready-made family without any obligation whatsoever. Why live with a family if you don't really want to commit to the family? And, what's in it for them? (GRG who is married to a man who has a daughter from a prior marriage for whom GRG sometimes paid more than her "fair" (whatever that is!) share to care for the child who was part of the package.)
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Feb 9, 2016 11:04:49 GMT -5
Well, what kind of extras every month? If he is consistently paying for things like going out to eat, movies, games, ect... Do they add up to near the amount she pays for the non fun stuff? If so I think it's unreasonable to then have him pay for a $500 dress because it will be much more than that, shoes, hair, whatever else... That's asking an awful lot. She needs a budget for sure. Movies, games, eating out, internet access, club sports fees, gas money occasionally. I have sat down and figured out what is the lowest amount of money I have spent on them in any given month since I moved in. It was $2000, which is more than the mortgage payment, plus utilities, cable, internet, and water combined. It is also over 3X what my monthly expenses were when I lived alone in an apartment. BUT, because I don't pay half the mortgage and 25% of the utilities in a direct payment to GF, I don't pay my 'fair share', according to many on here. It's not that you're not necessarily paying enough, it is that it is structured so that you are not a partner in this household, but the "bonus guy". When your GF pays all the have to's, while you pick up all the want to's, you get to be awesome bonus guy much of the time. But, if you ever want to put a clamp down on that for whatever reason, you're going to bare the brunt of the blame and whining, which could eventually come to, if bonus guy doesn't want to give us our bonuses, what good is he? Your set-up might work for couples with similar spending styles/money philosophies, but you don't. It is set up for you to always be the one supplying the fun, or the bad guy for being a voice of reason. You're screwed with this set-up, dude. I guess, unless you just want to open up your wallet every single time someone wants something. I think the only good way for a spender/saver couple to arrange this otherwise is to each contribute to the reasonable living expenses (and more, if you decide), and each gets to choose what they do with the rest. That way, you have more of a choice if you want to spend more or not. Now, with this setup, it just makes you the asshole if you don't give in every single time.
|
|
bean29
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 10,201
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 9, 2016 11:08:27 GMT -5
I love how you just automatically assume the worst about me Well all we have to go on is what you post...
And my assumption was correct here. You didn't buy a car for the family, you bought one for yourself. To summarize, the bank of Beer is closed because you just bought yourself a car (and are allowing one of the family to drive your old car w/approx. 200k miles on it but which you still own) and you plan to take three trips in the future - two for weddings of your friends and one for the wedding of your GF's friend.
The reason people assume that you may be omitting facts to make yourself look good is that you seem to do that with regularity. This is another example. You post something that makes it sound like you're contributing thousands to the family in purchasing a car for another family member and then taking them on 3 future trips. But when we dig a little, the car was purchased for you (and it's nice that you let one of the family drive your old beater but you still own it, it wasn't a gift to the family it still belongs to you so the "value" of what you've given the family is the value of each of the times the 16 year old drives it, not the value of the car) and two of the trips are for your benefit, not the benefit of the family. It's not clear if you misstate things on purpose to make yourself look good or if you're really this unaware of how selfish many of your actions are, but in either case it means people are hesitant to take your statements about your actions at face value.
Now you're posting that you contribute $2k a month to the family. You may have spent $2k, but it's reasonable to assume that your GF may not agree that all the spending was "for the family". Seriously, you think when a parent buys a car for their kid it should be in their own name? DD's car and D's cars are in DH's name. DH and I pay all expenses for the cars. My kids have no complaints about it either. If you put the car in the kids name - the insurance will be a lot more expensive. One of the cars has a lienholder and payments - happens to be the car my 18 year old is driving. I am not ready to turn that responsibility over to her. I have a co-worker who still very recently had his 25 year old Son's car in his name. He may have signed it over now, the son is responsible well educated and employed. my co-worker just has so many cars the family tends to switch up their daily drivers and he probably gets pretty good discounted insurance b/c he has so many cars.
I think Beer is probably a very nice, normally easy going guy and he is doing above and beyond for those kids. I have a BIL that does the same, (it drives my DH nuts b/c he is afraid when it comes time to retire BIL will have nothing and the GF's family will turn their backs on him).
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 9, 2016 11:26:50 GMT -5
Well all we have to go on is what you post...
And my assumption was correct here. You didn't buy a car for the family, you bought one for yourself. To summarize, the bank of Beer is closed because you just bought yourself a car (and are allowing one of the family to drive your old car w/approx. 200k miles on it but which you still own) and you plan to take three trips in the future - two for weddings of your friends and one for the wedding of your GF's friend.
The reason people assume that you may be omitting facts to make yourself look good is that you seem to do that with regularity. This is another example. You post something that makes it sound like you're contributing thousands to the family in purchasing a car for another family member and then taking them on 3 future trips. But when we dig a little, the car was purchased for you (and it's nice that you let one of the family drive your old beater but you still own it, it wasn't a gift to the family it still belongs to you so the "value" of what you've given the family is the value of each of the times the 16 year old drives it, not the value of the car) and two of the trips are for your benefit, not the benefit of the family. It's not clear if you misstate things on purpose to make yourself look good or if you're really this unaware of how selfish many of your actions are, but in either case it means people are hesitant to take your statements about your actions at face value.
Now you're posting that you contribute $2k a month to the family. You may have spent $2k, but it's reasonable to assume that your GF may not agree that all the spending was "for the family". Seriously, you think when a parent buys a car for their kid it should be in their own name?
No, I wouldn't put a car in a child's name. The issue isn't whose name the car is in, but the valuation of Beer's contribution.
In Beer's mind - and in what he represents in his posts - the entire value of the car counts as part of what he believes he contributed to the family. Since he still owns the car and it would still be his if he left tomorrow, the entire value of the car isn't a family contribution. The value of his contribution to the family that month is whatever it's worth to allow a teen to drive the car that month, not the value of the car.
For example, if the car is worth $3k, Beer didn't give $3k towards family expenses like he portrays. He instead contributed a couple of hundred dollars or whatever you want to value the drive time of the teen for that month.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Feb 9, 2016 12:46:42 GMT -5
Him paying her a set amount each month means SHE gets to be in charge of some of her money decisions. Food is a variable expense. I think we have shown on this board that there is great variability in what to spend for food. I have given the example of when I was first out of college and icing with a boyfriend... I spent lots of time with advertizements, shopping sales, clipping coupons. I could easily feed us for more than a week on 50$... Then he would buy some steaks for 50$ that was 2 meals maybe, but it was 'equal'.... No one knows how much she was spending on food before beer, and whether or not his contributions there are 'fair share' overall or not. Plus, it is something which can be manipulated in order to spend money elsewhere if desired. If she had a set sum, she could make that decision. As is she has no control. Exactly. Food is a place that some people economize and others splurge. But an even larger problem when it comes to their money dynamic is that once again, it's Beer making the decisions on all discretionary items and choosing the ones that give him personal fulfillment and even a bit of glory. He likes to cook - it gives him enjoyment - so he chooses to spend on it. He can make the favorite dishes of some of the family or show off his skills. Again, a form of control. Trust me, as a mom and as someone who does most of the cooking in our house being the one who buys the food and does the cooking is a form of control and can even be used as a way to get attention, convey or even withhold affection. Nobody appreciates it when you spend $2000 on the mortgage to pay for the room they sleep in or pay for the $250 electric bill that keeps the lights on, but make their favorite roast chicken and homemade mashed potatoes for $15 and the kids heap adulation on you like you're royalty.
Part of being a team of grown ups is that each of the grown ups should take on a share of the icky household stuff and each should take on a share of the enjoyable household stuff. Beer chooses to skim off the more enjoyable stuff, leaving GF with the icky stuff. Not nice.
I was on my way out to a show last night and did not get a chance to respond to this. The problem that I see is that if Beergut contributes to the household (i.e. him paying part of the mortgage), it means that he has a stake in her house as he can show that he helped pay for it. You may not think that this is an issue, but it *can* be down the line when/if they ever break up and he's paid on it for 10 years. Yes, he could pay for the utilities in full but would that really compensate for what he spends now? All that I can use is our utilities to act as a comparison. I think we pay about $170 for cable/internet, $100 for electricity, $60 for water/trash and another $150 for gas. Assuming that water, electricity are variable (the house is heated with gas, that wouldn't vary if there were 2 people living there or 10, neither would the cable), that means his contribution would be maybe $600. He's paying much more than that now, and I really would like you to tell me exactly how to feed a family of 5, including 3 teenagers on $600. I don't agree with you that you seem to think that cooking/providing meals is a source of glory or control. I know that that is not the reason why I cook. While I don't mind cooking, my original intention was that I was home and it just seemed more fair that since TD was coming home from work, the least I could do is make sure that dinner was ready for him so he didn't have to deal with it. When I was incapable of doing so, I know it was a hassle for him to think about feeding me each day and I hated that I wasn't able to contribute to that. It's not a control issue, nor do I look for 'glory'. I can't imagine anyone using food as a source of getting attention or withholding affection. To be quite honest, that sounds like you have an unhealthy attitude about food - to use it as a tool like this. At this point Beergut, I think that you should just pay up for what you'd pay for 1/2 of a room in a house, and 1/5th the utilities and be done with it. I'm guessing that your g/f is coming out way ahead with what you are doing now. I have no idea what her mortgage is, but seriously doubt that you'd be paying even $600/mo for your share of living there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 14:33:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 13:57:35 GMT -5
People pay rent all the time with no expectation of partial ownership.
So beer, what if you say, you can go with me to that destination wedding, or have the money for the prom dress... And let the girlfriend decide.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 15:20:50 GMT -5
I love how you just automatically assume the worst about me Well all we have to go on is what you post...
And my assumption was correct here. You didn't buy a car for the family, you bought one for yourself. To summarize, the bank of Beer is closed because you just bought yourself a car (and are allowing one of the family to drive your old car w/approx. 200k miles on it but which you still own) and you plan to take three trips in the future - two for weddings of your friends and one for the wedding of your GF's friend.
The reason I made the statement about you assuming the worst is because of quotes like this: You make up crap in your mind, and then try to state in on here like it is fact to justify your pre-existing opinion. Your assumption about the Sentra is another perfect example. I bought a beater (the Corolla) for myself to drive because I told GF I would help get a car for the 16 YO. I did that. You assume I gave the 16 YO a beater with 200k miles on it. The fact that it has 90k miles on it and is in terrific condition doesn't fit the story you're trying to create in your mind, so you make something up, and state it as fact. Your pattern here is to always assume the worst, and then when you are proven wrong, make some more crap up so you can continue to assume the worst.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 15:23:11 GMT -5
Seriously, you think when a parent buys a car for their kid it should be in their own name?
No, I wouldn't put a car in a child's name. The issue isn't whose name the car is in, but the valuation of Beer's contribution.
In Beer's mind - and in what he represents in his posts - the entire value of the car counts as part of what he believes he contributed to the family. Since he still owns the car and it would still be his if he left tomorrow, the entire value of the car isn't a family contribution. The value of his contribution to the family that month is whatever it's worth to allow a teen to drive the car that month, not the value of the car.
For example, if the car is worth $3k, Beer didn't give $3k towards family expenses like he portrays. He instead contributed a couple of hundred dollars or whatever you want to value the drive time of the teen for that month.
I have never said the value of the car counts as my contribution to the family. Stop making crap up and trying to state it as fact. And please stop being so arrogant as to assume you know what I think or what is going on in my mind, it makes you look stupid.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 9, 2016 16:43:17 GMT -5
No, I wouldn't put a car in a child's name. The issue isn't whose name the car is in, but the valuation of Beer's contribution.
In Beer's mind - and in what he represents in his posts - the entire value of the car counts as part of what he believes he contributed to the family. Since he still owns the car and it would still be his if he left tomorrow, the entire value of the car isn't a family contribution. The value of his contribution to the family that month is whatever it's worth to allow a teen to drive the car that month, not the value of the car.
For example, if the car is worth $3k, Beer didn't give $3k towards family expenses like he portrays. He instead contributed a couple of hundred dollars or whatever you want to value the drive time of the teen for that month.
I have never said the value of the car counts as my contribution to the family. Stop making crap up and trying to state it as fact. And please stop being so arrogant as to assume you know what I think or what is going on in my mind, it makes you look stupid. I'm not worried about looking stupid. Others may or may not agree with my point of view, but they don't generally tend to think I'm stupid. You worry about how you look here.
Whether the car you owned and the car you just bought yourself is a beater, new or in between, you didn't contribute a car to the family. You bought yourself a second car and are letting one of the family members drive a car that you own. My assumptions were correct - it was a car for you and yet you are implying the entire value of the car was your family contribution. Just like you count trips to see your family or to participate in your friends' weddings as part of your contribution to the family. The point is that these things benefit you more than the family. And instead of seeking to understand how your actions or your financial arrangement contributes to the problems that you keep on having, you think it's a better use of time to pick at irrelevant things or throw shade at others.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,563
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 9, 2016 17:34:30 GMT -5
IMHO finance systems between romantic partners should help achieve joint goals and minimize friction. Your system appears to be doing neither and should be reevaluated for that reason. Currently it's set up so that she has to come to you for the expenditures that drive you the most crazy. If DH had to come to me for every gadget or doohickey I would pop. So would he if saw my clothing and lunch bills. Giving each other set amounts to reduce judgement has been very helpful for us. Exactly right, and I think we all, minus one, seem to realize that. If the OP were really interested in minimizing friction (and not have to repeatedly come here to ask or complain about things) he would set things up differently.
Figure out with the GF what a fair share of expenses is, and pay that. Up front, to the partner. Then pay additionally for things that he wants to pay for but is not obligated to. Makes things a helluva lot more clear and easy to deal with. AND he doesn't get stuck with all of the people running to him and "imposing" on him for more. Money is far too big of an issue when there really doesn't seem to be a tremendous lack of it. Straighten it out, or it, because what is happening currently doesn't seem to be working very well.
|
|
beergut
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 11, 2011 13:58:39 GMT -5
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by beergut on Feb 9, 2016 18:49:21 GMT -5
I'm not worried about looking stupid. Others may or may not agree with my point of view, but they don't generally tend to think I'm stupid. You worry about how you look here.
Whether the car you owned and the car you just bought yourself is a beater, new or in between, you didn't contribute a car to the family. You bought yourself a second car and are letting one of the family members drive a car that you own. My assumptions were correct - it was a car for you and yet you are implying the entire value of the car was your family contribution. Just like you count trips to see your family or to participate in your friends' weddings as part of your contribution to the family. The point is that these things benefit you more than the family. And instead of seeking to understand how your actions or your financial arrangement contributes to the problems that you keep on having, you think it's a better use of time to pick at irrelevant things or throw shade at others.
Were you dropped on your head as a child? I swear to God, either you are being deliberately obtuse in an ill-advised attempt to win an internet argument, or you're freaking stupid. I'll put it in all caps for you: I DON'T CLAIM THE 16 YO'S CAR AS MY CONTRIBUTION TO THE FAMILY. I don't know how much clearer I can make it. If I was going to try to claim it as a contribution, my monthly expenses would be a hell of a lot higher than $2k a month. Once again, you make up a reality in your mind, state it as fact, and then act on your reality. This is the real world, not milee's imagination world. If you can't tell the different between the two, you might want to seek help. This isn't me 'throwing shade', this is me telling the truth when you are trying to propagate your own version of such.
|
|
vonna
Well-Known Member
Joined: Aug 11, 2012 15:58:51 GMT -5
Posts: 1,249
|
Post by vonna on Feb 9, 2016 18:51:08 GMT -5
IMHO finance systems between romantic partners should help achieve joint goals and minimize friction. Your system appears to be doing neither and should be reevaluated for that reason. Currently it's set up so that she has to come to you for the expenditures that drive you the most crazy. If DH had to come to me for every gadget or doohickey I would pop. So would he if saw my clothing and lunch bills. Giving each other set amounts to reduce judgement has been very helpful for us. My DH and I handled finances sooo differently. Before we married we reached a very important understanding. The (very shortened) version is that I need to have a significant "safety cushion" and he doesn't really care about money, just being able to pay for what he wants. He sees every months pay as a means to buy what he wants, I see every months pay as a means to ensure financial security.
Somehow we have made it work. But really, it is because he let me take control of the finances, and we still have "plenty" to have fun.
The more I read YM, the more I realize how differently people view money issues.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 14:33:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 18:52:07 GMT -5
It is the cost of your rental obligation this month. Unfortunately you don't have a fixed price for your rent and this happens to be an expensive month. Nope. We have three weddings to go to this Spring, and I just bought a car last week. The bank is closed. If 17YO and GF want this dress, they have two months to figure it out. If they want 17 YO to feel 'special' and get the nails done, hair done, and the 'dress of her dreams', they can foot the bill. Seems like you were counting it towards your contributions...
|
|