Mean with money

podperson

Treevo wrote: »

I think most normal couples make the distinction between being married and not.

I think people are getting very carried away by the OP paying a little bit more (and it is a little given she only earned £150 more than him - note: earned and not spent) early on in the relationship.

I don't think it's so much the amount as the fact that when the OP's partner was on a low income she was willing to put more money than him into the pot so he wouldn't be struggling. Now the situations are reversed he doesn't seem willing to make that gesture for her. I think that married or not if you're in a long term relationship then there should be an element of being in a partnership not each individual just looking after their own needs and not caring if the other is struggling.
I'm not married but have been with my OH for 13 years now, at times in the relationship he's earned more, at the moment I earn more so I pay more towards the bills. In the future that may change again but either way it would seem very wrong to us for one person to have lots of 'spare' cash while watching the person they loved struggle to make ends meet.

paulineb_2

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I was going to bring up this point.
With the second job, I presume that both of you feel you don't see as much of each other as you would like to.
By then spending money on, say, a pair of jeans you are saying that you value the pair of jeans more than you value your time with him.
As you only had a single pair of jeans with holes in then I think it is valid to say that you valued a new pair of jeans more than you valued your time with him. But if, for example, you spent £75 on a pair of jeans then I think it is right for him to be miffed at this.

While you don't have a joint budget of money you do, in effect, have a joint budget of time spent together. Money you spend means more hours you need to work to pay for it and less time you are together. So from that point of view I think he does have a right to ask you about it.
How would you feel if he took a second job (and so didn't do so much around the house and meant you didn't see him so often) and then spent the money on stuff that you thought wasn't necessary?

You need to work out, together, how to deal with your finances fairly. And he needs to work out, for himself, whether he values your time together over the money he spends on himself.

I dont think time together has any relevance unless they were spending a lot of time apart. She needed new jeans, she bought them.

The fact is, hes saving money while shes struggling. Id rather walk away and live on my own than be with someone who could watch me struggle financially while being ok with money himself.
A 50:50 split is unfair if someone earns significantly more than the other.

I have a friend who works part time, she has two kids, she earns about £400 a month and that goes into the joint account but her partner earns about 3 times that and he pays most of the bills.

If someones jeans need replaced they need replaced and the fact shes had to take on a second job shows just how tough this financial situation is on her.

Not him.

Orlando_Virgin

I can't get my head around this at all. After reading your post and the hints and situation you've clearly stated I don't understand what his game is. He's either incredibly selfish or ignorant, or both.

The jeans situation is absolutely pathetic and hypocritical, considering he is more than happy to lash his money up against the wall whilst you struggle.

You need a serious talk and quickly, to find out if he really cares, because to be fair you have been together a long time.

JimmyTheWig

paulineb wrote: »

I dont think time together has any relevance unless they were spending a lot of time apart. She needed new jeans, she bought them.

I don't think that they've got their money sorted properly, but I can see his point of view on this part.
I don't know your situation, paulineb, but if your partner decided to get a second job (and so do less around the house and spend less time with you) so that he could buy more stuff for himself that he didn't need would you be happy? Would it be more reasonable for him to take that second job so that he could manage to pay his agreed share of the bills and the bare essentials for himself? My guess is that you wouldn't be happy in the first scenario but would find the second more reasonable.
In which case what she is spending her money on is relevant.

floss2

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I don't think that they've got their money sorted properly, but I can see his point of view on this part.
I don't know your situation, paulineb, but if your partner decided to get a second job (and so do less around the house and spend less time with you) so that he could buy more stuff for himself that he didn't need would you be happy? Would it be more reasonable for him to take that second job so that he could manage to pay his agreed share of the bills and the bare essentials for himself? My guess is that you wouldn't be happy in the first scenario but would find the second more reasonable.
In which case what she is spending her money on is relevant.

I think the base of the issue is that the conversation has never been had, and that she has not told her partner that she cannot manage without the second job. If that was shared, maybe his attitude would be different. He seems to be ignorant of this fact.

paulineb_2

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I don't think that they've got their money sorted properly, but I can see his point of view on this part.
I don't know your situation, paulineb, but if your partner decided to get a second job (and so do less around the house and spend less time with you) so that he could buy more stuff for himself that he didn't need would you be happy? Would it be more reasonable for him to take that second job so that he could manage to pay his agreed share of the bills and the bare essentials for himself? My guess is that you wouldn't be happy in the first scenario but would find the second more reasonable.
In which case what she is spending her money on is relevant.

The issue is, that he insists on paying for bills in a 50 50 split even though he earns significantly more than her. If it was shared 60 40 or 70 30, she wouldnt need to take on the second job and be away from the home, because she would manage on the money she had.

And if the backside was falling out of my jeans, Id buy a new pair, people need clothes.

The agreed share of the bills is suiting him much more than its suiting her.

DeeDee74

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I was going to bring up this point.
With the second job, I presume that both of you feel you don't see as much of each other as you would like to.
By then spending money on, say, a pair of jeans you are saying that you value the pair of jeans more than you value your time with him.
As you only had a single pair of jeans with holes in then I think it is valid to say that you valued a new pair of jeans more than you valued your time with him. But if, for example, you spent £75 on a pair of jeans then I think it is right for him to be miffed at this.

While you don't have a joint budget of money you do, in effect, have a joint budget of time spent together. Money you spend means more hours you need to work to pay for it and less time you are together. So from that point of view I think he does have a right to ask you about it.
How would you feel if he took a second job (and so didn't do so much around the house and meant you didn't see him so often) and then spent the money on stuff that you thought wasn't necessary?

You need to work out, together, how to deal with your finances fairly. And he needs to work out, for himself, whether he values your time together over the money he spends on himself.

Wow seriously what planet re you on when she has to justifiers buying a pair of jeans to oh.??
Simple she has a second job to help pay her half of the bills cause her oh wont pay a fairer share . Now its wrong cause shes bought a pair of jeans and spent less time with her oh or home doing her share of the house work!!!!

Pixiechic

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I was going to bring up this point.
With the second job, I presume that both of you feel you don't see as much of each other as you would like to.
By then spending money on, say, a pair of jeans you are saying that you value the pair of jeans more than you value your time with him.
As you only had a single pair of jeans with holes in then I think it is valid to say that you valued a new pair of jeans more than you valued your time with him. But if, for example, you spent £75 on a pair of jeans then I think it is right for him to be miffed at this.

While you don't have a joint budget of money you do, in effect, have a joint budget of time spent together. Money you spend means more hours you need to work to pay for it and less time you are together. So from that point of view I think he does have a right to ask you about it.
How would you feel if he took a second job (and so didn't do so much around the house and meant you didn't see him so often) and then spent the money on stuff that you thought wasn't necessary?

You need to work out, together, how to deal with your finances fairly. And he needs to work out, for himself, whether he values your time together over the money he spends on himself.

That is my idea of hell.

So, she helped to support him in his studies which has enabled him to increase his earning potential and be more well off than the OP. The OP finds that she is struggling financially so she takes a second job.

Then the OH is annoyed because she is doing less housework and not spending enough time with him. Then begrudges her a new pair of jeans!!!! I wouldn't be spending too much time with him either!

Personally, I couldn't live like that. Sounds like he wants it all his way. She earns her own money and can do as she wants with it, OH seems to have that freedom.

If he was that concerned about it, he would take a bit more time to look at fairer ways for them to split expenses. I think that team work goes a very long way in a relationship and not very far without it.

Primrose

He may be a nice guy, but money is the root of all evil, and if you don't have a common view now on how you both spend your income, on your domestic expenditure, as well as your personal spending, I foresee trouble ahead. Many long term relationships and marriages fall at this hurdle. Hard though it may be to accept , I suspect you're probably not compatible and if you can't resolve this through some fairly prompt and comprehensive negotiations which will stand the test of time, it's probably time to move on. Argueing about money all the time just makes life miserable.

Going4TheDream

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I was going to bring up this point.
With the second job, I presume that both of you feel you don't see as much of each other as you would like to.
By then spending money on, say, a pair of jeans you are saying that you value the pair of jeans more than you value your time with him.
As you only had a single pair of jeans with holes in then I think it is valid to say that you valued a new pair of jeans more than you valued your time with him. But if, for example, you spent £75 on a pair of jeans then I think it is right for him to be miffed at this.

While you don't have a joint budget of money you do, in effect, have a joint budget of time spent together. Money you spend means more hours you need to work to pay for it and less time you are together. So from that point of view I think he does have a right to ask you about it.
How would you feel if he took a second job (and so didn't do so much around the house and meant you didn't see him so often) and then spent the money on stuff that you thought wasn't necessary?

You need to work out, together, how to deal with your finances fairly. And he needs to work out, for himself, whether he values your time together over the money he spends on himself.

Are you for real?

He is sitting on £10K a year more than the OP - clearly he values 'his' money more than spending time with his GF, or he would be paying a fair proportion to the bills based on his income and they would both have more time to spend together as he OP wouldnt need a second job.

The OP is in a quandry over the situation - the last thing they need is to be put on a guilt trip because they bought a much needed pair of jeans or that they are 'stealing' time away from their partner by having a much needed second job