yogiii
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 19:38:00 GMT -5
Posts: 5,377
|
Post by yogiii on May 13, 2011 12:22:01 GMT -5
I think what sarcastic said is the ideal way, however I wouldn't have wanted to do that, it is too formal for me.
DH and I didn't move in together until we were engaged. If you have the intention of marrying her some day then maybe something a little more informal is appropriate, like your option 2 (assuming she doesn't have issues handling her money). Maybe you pay rent, she pays utilities and 1 week you buy groceries, the next week she does. I just feel that in a committed relationship, writing each other checks just isn't very romantic you know? If you know she is the right person, maybe it can be a bit more casual without one person feeling taken advantage of.
|
|
Baby Fawkes
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 6, 2011 15:39:53 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by Baby Fawkes on May 13, 2011 12:22:10 GMT -5
I don't think it should matter who makes what, I think it should be split 50/50. It's the same as taxing the "rich" more under the premise that if you make more, you should pay more. Why??? Then again, I am probably the wrong person to ask bc I don't see myself living with anyone unless we are married. Lena It's a valid point, but as stl76 mentioned, sometimes there's enough of a difference that a copmromise is needed for the lifestyle. When my GF and I bought a house our wages are far enough apart that we woulnd't have been able to afford a a single family home with a garage if it was based entirely 50/50 on all expenses. The garage was important to me so I had absolutely no problems paying more to 'upgrade' because we could still afford it just fine. Ultimately it's all about comfort level. I would never had done that if I felt that I would have any resentment towards it as that's just setting up for failure and tension.
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 12:24:09 GMT -5
"I don't think it should matter who makes what, I think it should be split 50/50. It's the same as taxing the "rich" more under the premise that if you make more, you should pay more. Why???
Then again, I am probably the wrong person to ask bc I don't see myself living with anyone unless we are married. "
Aren't you a SAHW? So how can you be a SAHW and say it should be 50/50? Do you contribute 50% to the expenses? I don't think just because you are married doesn't mean all of a sudden a boyfriend who is now a husband has to start paying for everything. I am not judging you, I am just saying doesn't your life contradict what you just said??
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on May 13, 2011 12:30:51 GMT -5
BB, I can see how it can't be EXACTLY 50/50, bc let's face it, there is just no such thing. I just don't understand/agree with the idea of "you make more, you pay more". If OP at the end of the day wants to buy all the groceries, or pay cable, or be the one taking the GF out without her "paying it back", I think that's fine.
Also, as far as resentment goes, I think you don't really know until you live it for awhile. We've had number of posters saying "Oh, I thought it was a good idea at the beginning, but now it's not working for me and I don't know how to bring it up".
A lot of people are very funny the way money is spend by their SOs. It might sound good on paper "oh, I love her, we are in a relationship, she doesn't make that much, OF COURSE I'll pay more" and then 5-6 months later, GF is getting her nails done or is buying all kinds of crap bc now she has more DI and all that lovey-dovey stuff is forgotten and you think "Hmmm, if she can afford all that, why isn't she paying more rent".
I don't know..... may be I am over-thinking it too much, may be it's just that I don't get the whole "living together thing".... I know that splitting expenses worked really well for many posters on here, so I hope it works out for OP as well, not matter which way he decides to go.
Lena
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,490
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on May 13, 2011 12:34:18 GMT -5
We lived together just fine once I stopped overthinking everything. I'll admit I got all my ideas about how to do our finances from YM and kept trying to make a round peg fit into a square hole.
Once I tried to stop doing it "right" and did what worked best for us a lot of the crap disappeared.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on May 13, 2011 12:35:03 GMT -5
Stl,
Well, do you want me to answer your question in a "legal" way or just "life way?
Lena
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 12:41:25 GMT -5
Well, do you want me to answer your question in a "legal" way or just "life way? Umm, I am not sure what you mean by that. I guess legal way would be because you are entitled? But please answer both ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Again I am not judging your life choices, I just think it is a bit hypocratical to say it should be 50/50 while not working and contributing literally $0 (contributing as in financial only). Also, so if I am dating a guy and we live together, we should split 50/50 (or as close as possible) but as soon as we get married, I can just tell him to start paying for all the bills? That's how it comes across...
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 12:45:14 GMT -5
So what if you make more. Is she going to use only 1/3 of the utilities. 50/50 is the only way to fly. Regardless of income.
Yeah, no. As someone else said, what's the point of living with a SO who is so selfish as to expect you to pony up for half the tab when you make 1/4 of the income?
The exception is if the SO making less money insists on moving to a more expensive place they could never afford on their own in a million years and expects the SO making more money to pick up the difference.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
When DF and I moved in together (just dating at first), we tried to work it so that he just gave me money for bills. OMG that sucked. I can't deal with that system anymore.
Now that we're engaged, he has his checks deposited directly into my account so I can handle all bill-paying and savings. He wanted it that way, and even requested that I give him an allowance. He doesn't like handling money.
But I wasn't willing to do that before we were engaged. If I could do it all over again, I would probably have a portion of his paycheck (what I needed from him to cover his proportional share of the bills) auto-transferred into my account on each of his paydays. That's the only way I wouldn't nearly lose my mind trying to get rent paid on time from two different paychecks.
Definitely don't make her pay half unless you want this to be a short relationship.
By the way, congratulations and good luck!
|
|
CarolinaKat
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 16:10:37 GMT -5
Posts: 6,364
|
Post by CarolinaKat on May 13, 2011 12:55:05 GMT -5
But I wasn't willing to do that before we were engaged. If I could do it all over again, I would probably have a portion of his paycheck (what I needed from him to cover his proportional share of the bills) auto-transferred into my account on each of his paydays. That's the only way I wouldn't nearly lose my mind trying to get rent paid on time from two different paychecks. I like that plan actually... I might have to steal it in the future
|
|
Baby Fawkes
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 6, 2011 15:39:53 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by Baby Fawkes on May 13, 2011 12:55:29 GMT -5
Lena, you've got some really good points there and for most people I totally agree. The point about not really knowing if there's going to be any resentment and then possibly being in an awkward situation is actually a great one. I also sometimes forget that my current situation came about more organically over time in the same way that people sometimes do after getting married, but we just did it a couple of years earlier. Initially we were 50/50 and then graduated to our current situation where we're essentially joint. We started co-mingling after we learned to live with each other and what each other considers important to spend money on and came to the realisation that there's a lot of trust and we are both on the same financial page - she prefers not to have to do the work of paying the bills etc and lets me do it, but often makes the decisions ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on May 13, 2011 12:59:26 GMT -5
Stl,
I just view marriage very differently than "living together". To me, it's more of a commitment thing, more of a "future" thing. I can't get pass the idea that living together is really not much than roommates with benefits. For me, there is a very distinctive line between the two. It might not seem logical or even make any sense, I wish I could explain it better, but that's just how I see it.
Lena
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 13:06:24 GMT -5
I just view marriage very differently than "living together". To me, it's more of a commitment thing, more of a "future" thing. I can't get pass the idea that living together is really not much than roommates with benefits. For me, there is a very distinctive line between the two. It might not seem logical or even make any sense, I wish I could explain it better, but that's just how I see it.
I definitely intended to marry DF from the start - I wouldn't have moved in with him if we were "just dating" in the sense that I expected us to break up one day. I'd never lived with a SO before for that precise reason. However, since we weren't actually engaged yet I wanted to protect both of us. I didn't feel like it was fair for him to have to pay half of the expenses when he made less money than I did - and had he been on his own, he probably would have chosen a cheaper place.
In other words, if we had broken up I wouldn't have wanted him to feel like he had been living close to the edge all that time for the sake of a relationship that ended up not working out. I wanted him to have the same percentage of his resources available for his own stuff that I did. To me, that was the only fair thing.
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 13:10:40 GMT -5
"Stl,
I just view marriage very differently than "living together". To me, it's more of a commitment thing, more of a "future" thing. I can't get pass the idea that living together is really not much than roommates with benefits. For me, there is a very distinctive line between the two. It might not seem logical or even make any sense, I wish I could explain it better, but that's just how I see it.
Lena "
Actually I do agree with you to a certain point. I have never lived with anybody except for my ex-husband, not even with boyfriends that I dated for 3-4 years. But I am living with my current boyfriend because we are on the path to get married (september) and it just makes much more sense financially for both of us... You didn't really answer my question but it's ok, everybody has different feelings on this subject, some are more strong than others...
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on May 13, 2011 13:17:08 GMT -5
Stl, Well, legally, if we split up, we both would both be responsible for all our debts and I would be entitled to half of our savings. If "you" split up, what do you entitled to? I haven't worked for 3 yrs, so if he walked out today, I could fight for alimony. If you didn't work for 3 yrs, could you? I guess that's what I meant by "legal" answer. GFs/BFs have much fewer rights legally than spouses.
Lena
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 13:26:19 GMT -5
Lena,
I am pretty sure if I was contributing to my boyfriend's mortgage, i could fight too for my share in the equity. Yes you could fight for alimony but if you have worked in the past, you probably couldn't get it any more than I could. You didnt mention child support but anybody with kids could fight for that. But I don't think any parent should have to pay the other parent even child support (as long as both parents are willing to be equally involved), yet alone alimony... But that's just my opinion. I have a good job making good money, I have never thought I should be taken care of by a guy (unless he is my father and I was a kid).
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on May 13, 2011 13:26:40 GMT -5
"I wanted him to have the same percentage of his resources available for his own stuff that I did. "
I think this is key. If a couple splits everything 50/50 and one earns much more than the other, the lower earning person has not only less funds for their personal spending - they also have a smaller percentage as well. In my second marriage, my then H earned quite a bit more than I did. On top of that, he felt that any extras for my kids (from the first marriage) should be paid by me out of my personal allowance. That is, anything other than the basic necessities. AND he felt we should split the joint expenses 50/50.
I felt that was very unfair. Not only was my personal spending allowance smaller than his, it was also a lesser percentage AND he wanted me to pay for the kids' extra curricular activites, music lessons, etc out of it. He finally agreed to a more equitable split. But I still paid for the kids' extras.
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 13:28:44 GMT -5
"I felt that was very unfair. Not only was my personal spending allowance smaller than his, it was also a lesser percentage AND he wanted me to pay for the kids' extra curricular activites, music lessons, etc out of it. He finally agreed to a more equitable split. But I still paid for the kids' extras."
I am sorry but why would he have to pay for your kids from another marriage??? Did he promise that he will pay for them and back out?
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 13:32:34 GMT -5
If a couple splits everything 50/50 and one earns much more than the other, the lower earning person has not only less funds for their personal spending - they also have a smaller percentage as well.
Too, if the other person has a lot of extra constraints on their income, things can get really tight with a 50-50 split. DF had a lot more committed expenses than I did. Those were his problem as long as we were just dating. A 50-50 split would have meant that 90% of his take-home was going to expenses, leaving practically nothing for anything else. With a percentage split, it was more like 75% of his take-home.
While it wasn't my fault that his expenses added up to that much of his income before factoring in rent, neither did I feel like it would be right to penalize him for that choice when I made more money and we could have a more equitable deal.
I wouldn't have wanted to sock away thousands a month while he struggled just to keep up with his bills just so we could be "fair."
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on May 13, 2011 13:32:59 GMT -5
"I felt that was very unfair. Not only was my personal spending allowance smaller than his, it was also a lesser percentage AND he wanted me to pay for the kids' extra curricular activites, music lessons, etc out of it. He finally agreed to a more equitable split. But I still paid for the kids' extras." I am sorry but why would he have to pay for your kids from another marriage??? Did he promise that he will pay for them and back out? Well, I never hid them from him. When we married, it was clear to him that it was a package deal. And he knew that I did not recieve child support. I just thought it was cheap of him to not want to pay for the little extras when they were very affordable. (I made an average income; he made a lot). He thought nothing of dropping $1000 on a camera, but wanted me to pay for music lessons out of my smaller personal allowance.
|
|
sarcasticgirl
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 14:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 5,155
Location: Chicago
|
Post by sarcasticgirl on May 13, 2011 13:34:47 GMT -5
I don't think it should matter who makes what, I think it should be split 50/50. It's the same as taxing the "rich" more under the premise that if you make more, you should pay more. Why??? Then again, I am probably the wrong person to ask bc I don't see myself living with anyone unless we are married. Lena 50/50 is great in theory... but it's highly likely that the person making significantly more money is accustomed to a priceier place/lifestyle. Getting a place with DH (then DBF) actually made things more expensive for me. DH's cable preferences were so much higher than mine and DH certainly eats more than i do. when i lived alone, i could easily live on $75/ month groceries. I cook from scratch and eat well. our grocery budget now is over $300/month, so if we did 50/50, i'd be paying for my food and almost half of DHs! before we were married, we did 50/50 on some things.. rent/utilities but then DBF paid for the car, most of the cable and more than half of the groceries.
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 13:35:52 GMT -5
"Well, I never hid them from him. When we married, it was clear to him that it was a package deal. And he knew that I did not recieve child support. I just thought it was cheap of him to not want to pay for the little extras when they were very affordable. (I made an average income; he made a lot). He thought nothing of dropping $1000 on a camera, but wanted me to pay for music lessons out of my smaller personal allowance. "
I understand you didn't hide from him. But I think it would be unfair of you to automatically expect him to cover extra expenses for your kids just because he makes more money than you and you don't get child support. You said he already covered the basics. Did he promise you that he would pay for their extra-curricular activities and didn't come through or you just assumed he would because he made good money?
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 13:37:36 GMT -5
The other thing that bugs me about people who are anal about 50-50 split is how calculating it makes them seem. Why not just err on the side of being generous to your SO? If you both do that, everything will be fine.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on May 13, 2011 13:38:09 GMT -5
"I understand you didn't hide from him. But I think it would be unfair of you to automatically expect him to cover extra expenses for your kids just because he makes more money than you and you don't get child support. You said he already covered the basics. Did he promise you that he would pay for their extra-curricular activities and didn't come through or you just assumed he would because he made good money? "
Clearly, in hindsight, that is one of those things that should have been discussed. I did not argue the point. I simply paid if I had enough and if there wasn't enough in my personal allowance, they went without. He had no children and didn't want any. He WAS a very self centered person and that is one (of several) reasons the marriage did not last.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on May 13, 2011 13:38:53 GMT -5
I understand you didn't hide from him. But I think it would be unfair of you to automatically expect him to cover extra expenses for your kids just because he makes more money than you and you don't get child support. You said he already covered the basics. Did he promise you that he would pay for their extra-curricular activities and didn't come through or you just assumed he would because he made good money?
I think the answer to this one lies in how serious the relationship is. If you expect to get married, you should consider SO's kids your own.
|
|
|
Post by stl76 on May 13, 2011 13:42:40 GMT -5
" If you expect to get married, you should consider SO's kids your own. "
to a certain point and depends on the situation... If both parents are involved, I don't see why it should be up to the step-parent to give them the luxury items...
|
|
daisylu
Junior Associate
Enter your message here...
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 6:04:42 GMT -5
Posts: 7,055
|
Post by daisylu on May 13, 2011 13:43:18 GMT -5
I understand you didn't hide from him. But I think it would be unfair of you to automatically expect him to cover extra expenses for your kids just because he makes more money than you and you don't get child support. You said he already covered the basics. Did he promise you that he would pay for their extra-curricular activities and didn't come through or you just assumed he would because he made good money? I think the answer to this one lies in how serious the relationship is. If you expect to get married, you should consider SO's kids your own. ![](http://us.social.s-msn.com/s/images/emoticons/thumbs_up.gif)
|
|
daisylu
Junior Associate
Enter your message here...
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 6:04:42 GMT -5
Posts: 7,055
|
Post by daisylu on May 13, 2011 13:45:15 GMT -5
" If you expect to get married, you should consider SO's kids your own. " to a certain point and depends on the situation... If both parents are involved, I don't see why it should be up to the step-parent to give them the luxury items... That would depend on what you call a luxury.
|
|
sarcasticgirl
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 14:39:51 GMT -5
Posts: 5,155
Location: Chicago
|
Post by sarcasticgirl on May 13, 2011 13:45:17 GMT -5
I can't even fathom my step-father telling my mother "they're your kids... you pay for their $hit!"
it's not like a credit card bill or a student loan that you take on before you get married... it's a child that you're bringing into your family and for which you are acting as a father figure.
|
|
daisylu
Junior Associate
Enter your message here...
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 6:04:42 GMT -5
Posts: 7,055
|
Post by daisylu on May 13, 2011 13:47:43 GMT -5
In the "stepfather" situation, usually the kids spend more time with the stepfather than they do their actual father. That makes them family, and I would expect them to be treated accordingly.
|
|