Real life MMD: My hubby earns more. Should he pay more of joint bills?

Traveller1981

BNT wrote: »

But that's my point. Who earns what doesn't make much difference to what a family buys. You can have a joint account or seperate accounts, but in the end, you're buying the same things. A joint account can help people stop looking at his money and her money, but couples are quite capable of doing that with several accounts. If I had my own account it wouldn't mean that I suddenly have more money to spend on things I want (as I earn most of the money in our family). The household income and therefore our disposable income is still the same regardless of whose account it sits in.

Yes you are buying the same things in essence, but only the "family or joint" things. Personal items are still not accounted for. You are happy with personal items coming out of the "pot", whereas, I prefer my personal items coming out of my accounts. Our joint account has enough money for all the family outgoings (all bills, food, baby stuff, house purchases etc) and then what is left in my account I can chuck in an ISA, or buy a new phone, overpay the mortgage. But the main difference, I could do any of things at any point with the money. So I may overpay the mortgage for 3 months, which means more of my money becomes a family purchase, so would be just as well be in a joint account, but I could also buy a new TV one month, a new phone the next, and a new console the one after. I am just happy knowing that my extravagances aren't being paid for by my partner, but am happy to chuck, what I see as my personal disposable income, at family purchases if I want to.
I hope that makes sense!

oncecalledfred

I appreciate that different people have different ways that they chose to live. What I do know is my vows to my husband and vice versa was "...ALL THAT I HAVE I SHARE WITH YOU...." and we completely meant it. I consider this to be part of a 'true' partnership.

At the beginning of our marriage, I worked, he studied, I paid everything, all of it was equally ours, now he works, I am full time mum, his wage pays for everything and its still all equally ours. A treat is when I buy something that I know my husband really likes and spend less on what I like for that month. I guess 'marriage' means different things to different people??

BNT

Traveller1981 wrote: »

Yes you are buying the same things in essence, but only the "family or joint" things. Personal items are still not accounted for. You are happy with personal items coming out of the "pot", whereas, I prefer my personal items coming out of my accounts. Our joint account has enough money for all the family outgoings (all bills, food, baby stuff, house purchases etc) and then what is left in my account I can chuck in an ISA, or buy a new phone, overpay the mortgage. But the main difference, I could do any of things at any point with the money. So I may overpay the mortgage for 3 months, which means more of my money becomes a family purchase, so would be just as well be in a joint account, but I could also buy a new TV one month, a new phone the next, and a new console the one after. I am just happy knowing that my extravagances aren't being paid for by my partner, but am happy to chuck, what I see as my personal disposable income, at family purchases if I want to.
I hope that makes sense!

It makes sense, but I am not sure we are disagreeing. Whether we have a joint account or seperate accounts isn't going to make a difference to what personal items I buy. As the higher earner I would have more money in my seperate account. That doesn't mean I have more to spend on personal items. We have the same household income and can afford the same things as if the money is all in one pot. I guess I could tell my wife that I am going to buy a new TV, so she'll have to do without her yoga classes this year, but then I am acting as an individual with my own source of income rather than as a husband with a household budget. I'd have support from the children though.

I find it interesting that you put a TV or a console under personal items. Surely those are household items. One person might make more use of them than other family members, but I assume you don't have your own room where you sit and watch TV or play games.

stampychan

elvis86 wrote: »

As you said yourself, this is irrelevant. It doesn't matter who earns more in terms of gender (OH and I are gay so it really doesn't apply to us!).

Yep, was just clarifying because you seemed to be coming at it assuming I was the lower earner. Sorry if that wasn't the case - was just how it read.

elvis86 wrote: »

I just think it's an odd approach to take; "Well dear, we have a combined income of £70k, but you only earns £7k of it, so we're going to live a lifestyle that two people earning £7k can afford, and I'm going to keep the rest of my money for myself - why should I share it with you?".

Not really - lots of other people on this thread are saying similar things - they don't necessarily want to share the money they're earning. When I'm with someone it's about spending time together, being together, and sharing things other than money. If my relationship depended on one or other of us giving up something of theirs so the other could have it, I'd be massively uncomfortable.

elvis86 wrote: »

I think you're confusing independence with selfishness, TBH. Possibly there are reasons for your attitude harking back to your childhood, but it still sounds quite...mean.:(

I honestly don't understand why, and again I think you're making a lot of judgements and assumptions. Why should it be assumed that when I'm in a relationship with someone I have to effectively hand over a portion of my income to them? And at what point in any relationship does that suddenly become the case? Presumably you wouldn't expect me to top-up my partner's income if we'd only been going out for two weeks, so at what point in our relationship (a year, two years, etc) do I suddenly get labelled 'mean' because I'm not giving him an allowance?

I'm a huge believer in personal freedoms, etc. And as I wouldn't give any money to a partner likewise I would never expect them to give any to me, or indeed label them 'mean' because they wanted to benefit from their own hard work.

Again, to reiterate - I'm not telling anyone that this is how things *have* to be, I'm saying that this is how they are for me, and it's a satisfying, effective way to do things. I think it's spectacularly unfair and judgemental to declare that anyone who earns more than their partner is 'mean' unless they subsidise them until the couple are earning effectively the same.

Ebenezer_Screwj

I don't know, maybe you should ask your husband what he thinks. In our house we share the cost of holidays, I pay all the bills and my wife takes care of the food and household expenses. It works out about 50:50 but who's counting - we often help each other out with this and that, what's mine is hers and vice versa.

justruth

I think that you were sensible to have this discussion before hand to establish a common understanding on how you would deal with money as a married couple. I think that only you and your husband know how that conversation went so really this extrinsic input is a little ill informed.

I would suggest that you either try to discuss with your husband that he take on more of the bills based on his increased earnings. I would also suggest that you do not use the term unfair, as he is being entirely fair in living up to the arrangement that you both made initially.

Should your husband not want to take on more of the bills, then you have options such as staying in more, getting another part time job etc, (whichever best fits in with your circumstance). I certainly commend your efforts to put together some savings.

dinosaur7

It's clear from the comments on this forum that lots of people have views about what a couple 'should' do, but it's a very personal thing and you and your husband should talk it over and do whatever feels right for you...and ignore what anyone else says or thinks!

It's really important to be able to talk to your other half about this sort of thing, so please do talk to him, and I'm sure you will be able to come to an arrangement that is right for you.

elvis86

stampychan wrote: »

Not really - lots of other people on this thread are saying similar things - they don't necessarily want to share the money they're earning. When I'm with someone it's about spending time together, being together, and sharing things other than money.

I guess it's lucky when you meet someone with the same feelings, then. Because if someone I was in a relationship with suddenly adopted this attitude when we came to move in together or commit to spending the rest of our lives together; I'm not sure I'd want to be with him any more.

stampychan wrote: »

If my relationship depended on one or other of us giving up something of theirs so the other could have it, I'd be massively uncomfortable.

I'd be massively uncomfortable if I earned 3 times as much as my OH and was left with most of my salary as disposable income whilst he ended up with very little of his due to a 50/50 split. Similarly, if I was the low earner I'd bes really hurt if my OH wanted things this way or insisted that we live somewhere cheap so we could split the bills 50/50 and he could keep the rest of his money for himself.

I would expect us to live the best life possible with our combined income.

stampychan wrote: »

I honestly don't understand why, and again I think you're making a lot of judgements and assumptions. Why should it be assumed that when I'm in a relationship with someone I have to effectively hand over a portion of my income to them? And at what point in any relationship does that suddenly become the case?

When you choose to move in with them or make a life-long commitment to them. Simple.

stampychan wrote: »

Presumably you wouldn't expect me to top-up my partner's income if we'd only been going out for two weeks, so at what point in our relationship (a year, two years, etc) do I suddenly get labelled 'mean' because I'm not giving him an allowance?

Again, when you choose to move in with them or make a life-long commitment to them (though I wouldn't think of it as "an allowance", that's indicative of your (IMO, weird) attitude).

stampychan wrote: »

I'm a huge believer in personal freedoms, etc. And as I wouldn't give any money to a partner likewise I would never expect them to give any to me, or indeed label them 'mean' because they wanted to benefit from their own hard work.

You seem to approach relationships from the perspective that the other person is going to want to take your money, and you don't want to share? It's just very alien to me.

scouserbear

When I was with my ex, my wages went into his bank account and I had the family allowance, he then decided that I should pay the council tax each month. His reasoning being that I only had to ask and I could have anything I needed and yes he was generous until, our marriage broke down and I discovered a savings account AGAIN in his name with £16000 in it. When we seperated he quit his job and because he 'lost' his company car bought himself a car for £9000 cash and had to use his savings to live on, subsequently he now has no savings and our old home is now on the market. So I would say, definately keep control of your own finances and have an account for the bills.

tallgirld

I thought that a marriage was a partnership. You already agreed to split the bills 50/50 so if you can not save any money let your husband do all the saving! Get a joint savings account and let him fill it up :-)