Early-retirement wannabe

JoeEngland

mgdavid wrote: »

Then again, to aim that statement at the poster is in itself dictatorial and.... controlling !
It seems they have worked out an amenable way of hitting their financial objectives, who are we to criticise?
None of our business is my view. Far too much Orwell in today's world....

Well, this is a public forum so people are bound to respond, and the question is about how "amenable" their way of managing finances actually is. I think the reason for so many critical responses is because of a concern at how his partner may be being controlled. What he's said has clearly rung the same alarm bells for several posters.

mgdavid

JoeEngland wrote: »

Well, this is a public forum so people are bound to respond, and the question is about how "amenable" their way of managing finances actually is. I think the reason for so many critical responses is because of a concern at how his partner may be being controlled. What he's said has clearly rung the same alarm bells for several posters.

Of course, there are always people at opposite ends of the spectrum. What's less common is the ability to acknowledge that both ends of the spectrum are equally valid given certain detailed circumstances. Which in this instance we don't actually know.
When HK says it works for 'them' I'm more inclined to believe him than jump to conclusions and label him an abuser.

happyandcontented

mgdavid wrote: »

Of course, there are always people at opposite ends of the spectrum. What's less common is the ability to acknowledge that both ends of the spectrum are equally valid given certain detailed circumstances. Which in this instance we don't actually know.
When HK says it works for 'them' I'm more inclined to believe him than jump to conclusions and label him an abuser.

Then I am sorry, but you are looking the other way.

Had he not posted that his wife had 'squirrelled away' money to purchase something she wanted.

Had he not posted that she had done so because she knew he wouldn't sanction the purchase.

Had he not posted that she had tried to deceive him over the cab fare when she came home ill, all to add a meagre (in the scheme of their combined earnings)£20 to her secret stash then you may have a point.

As it is, you don't. The way he treats their finances is clearly not working for her or none of the above would be necessary or true.

bluenose1

Ha, must admit I squirrel money away from oh now and again. I got £80 pay arrears this month and won't be telling him. In fact it is already earmarked for some new winter clothes as I have lost weight (intermittent fasting but that is another story.) Only Matalan as £80 won't go far. Not cos he is controlling, far from it. In fact it is me who is the bossy one.
Nowt strange as folk.

DairyQueen

MallyGirl wrote: »

My DH has absolutely no knowledge of, or interest in, our finances.

This resonates with me.

Last weekend I reminded OH that he had transferred a specific share into my name (tax reasons). His response: "I had forgotten about that".

(sigh).

Bravepants

Terron wrote: »

I don't suppose it showed a husband handing over his pay to his wife and then being given a small amount back as beer money. That was the norm in many working class communities before and after 1910.

Aaah, simpler times! If all I had, or indeed needed, was beer money I would be content! :j

Bravepants

vulcanrtb wrote: »

He said it was a smart watch.

Only 7 posts, but what a great first impression! Hehe!

mgdavid

happyandcontented wrote: »

Then I am sorry, .......

your apology accepted...

happyandcontented

mgdavid wrote: »

your apology accepted...

:T if you need to feel that way.....;)

atush

mgdavid wrote: »

your apology accepted...

It is you who should appologise.

People who look the other way all the time and that allows abuse to go on with impugnity.

Is H the antichrist? No. I was an admirer and feel duped/dissappointed really.