ariadne999 Posted April 1, 2012 Posted April 1, 2012 I'd say that less than 50% of wives do things like take full 50% of responsibility for things like actually tuning up the family cars, landscaping the yard, painting walls, stripping wallpaper & flooring & 1001 other grubby hands on tasks to that go into running a shared life. i've yet to meet a man that did those things either. Unless he was hired and usually an immigrant. white american men are just as spoiled and entitled as the princesses we hear about here on LS.
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 50/50 split is such a horrible idea that I can't even breathe. Here's what 50/50 says: "If you want to live with me comfortably, you have to make as least as much money as I do." And it will never be precisely equitable unless both people make the exact same amount of money. That's not going to happen, and even if it does, it's a completely arbitrary requirement which otherwise would have nothing to do with your compatibility, until you make it a factor with dumb requirements like these. In what universe is this a good idea? Put it another way: I have had the great fortune of landing an awesome job 3,000 miles away. They're going to cover my moving costs, and my salary is going to allow me to live in a pretty nice part of town. This opportunity came out of nowhere, so in order for my girlfriend whom I love and cherish to come with me, she's going to have to quit her job and come out on the whim, and I'm going to have to pay for the both of us until she can get a job. Even still, her job won't make the same money mine does, so if I want us to live the way I want us to live, I'm going to have to fork out more than she will. If I were to listen to the arguments in here, I'd have to break up with my girlfriend. At the very least, I'd have to live in a ****ty apartment a few miles away from the city, just to meet this ****ty requirement about what a good, fair, healthy relationship is. Eff you see kay all of that. Those are completely and utterly the wrong decisions. And yet that's the logical conclusion of this bull**** "50/50 is fair" reasoning. You know what isn't fair? That my passion happens to be lucrative, and hers happens not to be. You know what isn't fair? Life's not ****ing fair, and your significant other is supposed to help you with that unfairness, not slap you in the face with it. 50/50 is fair if you're living with a roommate. Is that what your SO is to you? A roommate? Okay, then hit her with the 50/50, it's only fair. You want to take on what could well become a years long obligation to support somebody you're playing house with in order to take a great job? Be my guest. Sorry but "choosing" a career path that pays poorly carries consequences & I'm not interested in carrying the weight of those choices for anybody. You're a healthy, able bodied adult? best find a way to handle 50% of our shared reasonable lifestyle expenses or hit the bricks.
tigressA Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 50/50 split is such a horrible idea that I can't even breathe. Here's what 50/50 says: "If you want to live with me comfortably, you have to make as least as much money as I do." And it will never be precisely equitable unless both people make the exact same amount of money. That's not going to happen, and even if it does, it's a completely arbitrary requirement which otherwise would have nothing to do with your compatibility, until you make it a factor with dumb requirements like these. In what universe is this a good idea? Put it another way: I have had the great fortune of landing an awesome job 3,000 miles away. They're going to cover my moving costs, and my salary is going to allow me to live in a pretty nice part of town. This opportunity came out of nowhere, so in order for my girlfriend whom I love and cherish to come with me, she's going to have to quit her job and come out on the whim, and I'm going to have to pay for the both of us until she can get a job. Even still, her job won't make the same money mine does, so if I want us to live the way I want us to live, I'm going to have to fork out more than she will. If I were to listen to the arguments in here, I'd have to break up with my girlfriend. At the very least, I'd have to live in a ****ty apartment a few miles away from the city, just to meet this ****ty requirement about what a good, fair, healthy relationship is. Eff you see kay all of that. Those are completely and utterly the wrong decisions. And yet that's the logical conclusion of this bull**** "50/50 is fair" reasoning. You know what isn't fair? That my passion happens to be lucrative, and hers happens not to be. You know what isn't fair? Life's not ****ing fair, and your significant other is supposed to help you with that unfairness, not slap you in the face with it. 50/50 is fair if you're living with a roommate. Is that what your SO is to you? A roommate? Okay, then hit her with the 50/50, it's only fair. I like this post. x1000. People who insist on splitting everything 50/50 in their relationships should relegate themselves to dating people who have a similar, if not equal, income. They have no right to make their own partner, someone they love, feel like s*it about their life choices and that they don't make as much money. If 'playing fair' is so important to them, they should make sure the field itself is level.
Dust Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 50/50 split is such a horrible idea that I can't even breathe. Now I'm tempted to tell you all my other ideas! Here's what 50/50 says: "If you want to live with me comfortably' date=' you have to make as least as much money as I do." And it will never be precisely equitable unless both people make the [i']exact[/i] same amount of money. That's not going to happen, and even if it does, it's a completely arbitrary requirement which otherwise would have nothing to do with your compatibility, until you make it a factor with dumb requirements like these. In what universe is this a good idea? I go on the facts presented in the OP not some arbitrary extreme situation. I also gave an arbitrary example like a person making a lot of money while one doesn't. I hardly consider making a few thousand more enough to justify what this guy is asking for. Put it another way: I have had the great fortune of landing an awesome job 3' date='000 miles away. They're going to cover my moving costs, and my salary is going to allow me to live in a pretty nice part of town. This opportunity came out of nowhere, so in order for my girlfriend whom I love and cherish to come with me, she's going to have to quit her job and come out on the whim, and I'm going to have to pay for the both of us until she can get a job. Even still, her job won't make the same money mine does, so if I want us to live the way I want us to live, I'm going to have to fork out more than she will. [/quote'] Yes yes we know you big bragger. Seriously I should get their first and assume your identity they probably wouldn't even remember your face. Remember we're having that beer when you get into town man no talk of 50/50 they're all on me! If I were to listen to the arguments in here' date=' I'd have to break up with my girlfriend. At the very least, I'd have to live in a ****ty apartment a few miles away from the city, just to meet this ****ty requirement about what a good, fair, healthy relationship is. Eff you see kay all of that. Those are completely and utterly the wrong decisions. And yet that's the logical conclusion of this bull**** "50/50 is fair" reasoning. You know what isn't fair? That my passion happens to be lucrative, and hers happens not to be. You know what isn't fair? Life's not ****ing fair, and your significant other is supposed to [i']help[/i] you with that unfairness, not slap you in the face with it. 50/50 is fair if you're living with a roommate. Is that what your SO is to you? A roommate? Okay, then hit her with the 50/50, it's only fair. So sad when people can't seperate their own lives from the advice they give. tsk tsk. It's especialy sad when they have black and white logic. Finaly its sad when they feen the need to brag about lucrative passions. You're ripe to be taken advantage of. I don't think you are in the situation you described asking your gf to move out with you to a place you picked out with your suposed nice job... but given the situation 40k a year person number 2 is in your logic falls flat. In the end I guess every one has to do whats right for them... but if you don't notice person number 1 the op has turned things about money! Its one thing for you to offer and not make a thing about it, completely differnet to start doing the math of how much debt some one has and how much they make...
123321 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I like this post. x1000. He does it because he wants to do it, and he wants to live in a place that his SO can't afford. That's cool, I feel and do the same, but IMO it shouldn't be expected.
tigressA Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 He does it because he wants to do it, and he wants to live in a place that his SO can't afford. That's cool, I feel and do the same, but IMO it shouldn't be expected. And I agree that it shouldn't be expected. My sentiment is what I expressed in my initial post: that if you are concerned with your SO being able to pull their financial weight, you should relegate yourself to dating those within your own range of income because condescending to someone you're dating who makes less than you do isn't cool. It's downright a**hole-ish. 1
123321 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 And I agree that it shouldn't be expected. My sentiment is what I expressed in my initial post: that if you are concerned with your SO being able to pull their financial weight, you should relegate yourself to dating those within your own range of income because condescending to someone you're dating who makes less than you do isn't cool. It's downright a**hole-ish. Same income, or be willing to live a lifestyle that's compatible with the lower income. Putting the other person into hardship is uncool. Stuffing big stacks of cash into investments and living modestly is decidedly cool imo. 1
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I like this post. x1000. People who insist on splitting everything 50/50 in their relationships should relegate themselves to dating people who have a similar, if not equal, income. They have no right to make their own partner, someone they love, feel like s*it about their life choices and that they don't make as much money. If 'playing fair' is so important to them, they should make sure the field itself is level. You know what? I'm heartily sick to death of having to apologize & grovel in front of a partner simply because I worked my arse off to be successful! Nobody waved a magic wand over me saying "here's a great job & a lot of money" I WORKED to get where I am professionally. I'm tired of being made to "feel like s*it" and guilt tripped into paying other people's bills.
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Same income, or be willing to live a lifestyle that's compatible with the lower income. Putting the other person into hardship is uncool. Stuffing big stacks of cash into investments and living modestly is decidedly cool imo. I'll happily live in a place that is more modest so that the other person can afford to pay their 1/2 of the rent. I've never had a problem with that option.
tigressA Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Same income, or be willing to live a lifestyle that's compatible with the lower income. Putting the other person into hardship is uncool. Stuffing big stacks of cash into investments and living modestly is decidedly cool imo. This too. And soserious: Maybe you wouldn't be guilt-tripped into 'paying other people's bills' if you dated people who shared your values! Gasp!
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 This too. And soserious: Maybe you wouldn't be guilt-tripped into 'paying other people's bills' if you dated people who shared your values! Gasp! Which is exactly what I'm doing now, no more free loading leeches for this woman!
tigressA Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Which is exactly what I'm doing now, no more free loading leeches for this woman! Wonderful!
123321 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 This too. Well I like to live simply, and as a bonus setting resources aside for later, within reason, is a good personality trait as far as I'm concerned. I really appreciate and admire people who work hard and live simply by choice. Sort of the anti-version of keeping up with the Jones's.
reallyhotguy Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Now I'm tempted to tell you all my other ideas! I go on the facts presented in the OP not some arbitrary extreme situation. I also gave an arbitrary example like a person making a lot of money while one doesn't. I hardly consider making a few thousand more enough to justify what this guy is asking for. Yes yes we know you big bragger. Seriously I should get their first and assume your identity they probably wouldn't even remember your face. Remember we're having that beer when you get into town man no talk of 50/50 they're all on me! So sad when people can't seperate their own lives from the advice they give. tsk tsk. It's especialy sad when they have black and white logic. Finaly its sad when they feen the need to brag about lucrative passions. You're ripe to be taken advantage of. I don't think you are in the situation you described asking your gf to move out with you to a place you picked out with your suposed nice job... but given the situation 40k a year person number 2 is in your logic falls flat. In the end I guess every one has to do whats right for them... but if you don't notice person number 1 the op has turned things about money! Its one thing for you to offer and not make a thing about it, completely differnet to start doing the math of how much debt some one has and how much they make... You think that's bragging? Did you know I have Obama on speed dial? I guess it really has nothing to do with what anyone makes. All that matters is what both people are willing to pay. If that agreement isn't equitable to both parties then a negotiation has to happen, but then you're doing business on a pleasure trip, which is its own issue.
Dust Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 You think that's bragging? Did you know I have Obama on speed dial? I guess it really has nothing to do with what anyone makes. All that matters is what both people are willing to pay. If that agreement isn't equitable to both parties then a negotiation has to happen, but then you're doing business on a pleasure trip, which is its own issue. I think this is what it comes down to for me too. I mean if you wanted your gf to come and you're happy flipping the bill thats great. If you had to be talked into and argued into it then it will never work. I also agree with partner 2 based on the facts given. When you get in town and we're down all those drinks and smoking our cigars we'll drunk dial Mr. Obama should be epic. Then we'll both have something to brag about. 1
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 You think that's bragging? Did you know I have Obama on speed dial? I guess it really has nothing to do with what anyone makes. All that matters is what both people are willing to pay. If that agreement isn't equitable to both parties then a negotiation has to happen, but then you're doing business on a pleasure trip, which is its own issue. Negotiation is required in any aspect of life involving other people. The other option being discussed here, where the higher earner pays the bulk of the rent but gets to call the final shots as to where the couple will live sets up a slow simmering resentment in the lower earner that will poison the relationship over time. I'd rather have an honest discussion about what both of us can afford & have both of us agree together about a place, even if that place is a lot less nicer than I can afford. People need personal dignity & part of that comes from knowing you're pulling your weight fully fiscally
zengirl Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 50/50 split is such a horrible idea that I can't even breathe. Here's what 50/50 says: "If you want to live with me comfortably, you have to make as least as much money as I do." And it will never be precisely equitable unless both people make the exact same amount of money. That's not going to happen, and even if it does, it's a completely arbitrary requirement which otherwise would have nothing to do with your compatibility, until you make it a factor with dumb requirements like these. In what universe is this a good idea? That's kind of how I feel. Most people date fairly close to their socio-economic level anyway, but there's such a wide gap among educated professionals that it would often cause problems in that group. The very rich can do 50/50 easily -- more than enough money -- and the poor generally do, "Here's all my money, let's hope we can pay enough of the bills to keep stuff on this month." (Left over? Ha! That's a funny joke.) Though by "poor" I mean actual poor people (not college students or various other groups that think they're "poor"). Neither of those groups have this problem -- hell even poor people co-habitating in non-relationship, non-familial situations tend to be more likely to chip in till it all gets paid and share, IME. This is a purely middle class discussion, and the middle class is vast. When you're dealing with a 10K difference like in the OP, that's chump change compared to what many couples have. Put it another way: I have had the great fortune of landing an awesome job 3,000 miles away. They're going to cover my moving costs, and my salary is going to allow me to live in a pretty nice part of town. This opportunity came out of nowhere, so in order for my girlfriend whom I love and cherish to come with me, she's going to have to quit her job and come out on the whim, and I'm going to have to pay for the both of us until she can get a job. Even still, her job won't make the same money mine does, so if I want us to live the way I want us to live, I'm going to have to fork out more than she will. This is what I generally see happen and why 50/50 doesn't work for most couples. I also think people also underestimate the subtle ways why "Equal" might not work. So, you're willing to get a cheaper apartment that you can both split 50/50? Okay. What if your SO always lived with several roommates because he/she never wanted housing to be more than a certain amount so he/she could spend on other things and you really want a place with just the two of you and there's nothing in that range but there is something in the range YOU would find acceptable for their income? What about the cost of food? Are you willing to use generic brand house stuff or do you like the fancy toilet paper? Do you need the fastest tier of internet? Do you save electricity properly or waste it? Does one partner use a disproportionate amount of electric -- i.e. use the aircon all the time whereas the other does not? Etc etc etc. You can go on for ages, and the end of calculation just never comes. I agree with you for the most part, but IMO the person paying significantly less is also beholden to let their partner decide where they should live, since he/she will be the one paying the largest percentage of the total. It's just common consideration and courtesy. It smacks of entitlement to say, 'Hey, I make half what you do, so I'll be paying 33% of the rent, and lets get that beachside bungalow! No, I don't want that crappy cheap apartment!' True, as well. Really, I think arguments like this one should STICK OUT AND BE REMEMBERED. I have a feeling that couples who have many of them, regardless of their views, are not going to last unless those issues are sufficiently resolved (which may be impossible). 1
Els Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I also think people also underestimate the subtle ways why "Equal" might not work. So, you're willing to get a cheaper apartment that you can both split 50/50? Okay. What if your SO always lived with several roommates because he/she never wanted housing to be more than a certain amount so he/she could spend on other things and you really want a place with just the two of you and there's nothing in that range but there is something in the range YOU would find acceptable for their income? What about the cost of food? Are you willing to use generic brand house stuff or do you like the fancy toilet paper? Do you need the fastest tier of internet? Do you save electricity properly or waste it? Does one partner use a disproportionate amount of electric -- i.e. use the aircon all the time whereas the other does not? Etc etc etc. You can go on for ages, and the end of calculation just never comes. I think this is pretty much it. It is impossible, in life, to make everything 50.000000000000000000000000000000%. And in my experience, the people who are the most insistent on 50.0000000000000000000000% (as opposed to give and take roughly half the time), are usually insistent on not being the one to 'lose out on anything in a relationship', ever. So they don't really mean they're only willing to give 50%, they mean they're willing to give 50% or anything less. I really don't see why some people are so hung up on financial stuff, tbh. It's just one issue of a shared partnership, just like any other. Do people count and make sure that each partner gets exactly the same number of orgasms a month and the same intensity? That each partner does exactly 50% of house chores? That each partner is the one to back down and apologize 50% of the time in arguments? If we can give and take on other aspects of a relationship, taking into account circumstances, relationship dynamics and individual traits, why are rent and bills exempt from that?
ariadne999 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I really don't see why some people are so hung up on financial stuff, tbh. It's just one issue of a shared partnership, just like any other. Do people count and make sure that each partner gets exactly the same number of orgasms a month and the same intensity? That each partner does exactly 50% of house chores? That each partner is the one to back down and apologize 50% of the time in arguments? you must not make very much money.
darkmoon Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Well, if you want to get into who does or doesn't do tasks in a marriage, I'd say that less than 50% of wives do things like take full 50% of responsibility for things like actually tuning up the family cars, landscaping the yard, painting walls, stripping wallpaper & flooring & 1001 other grubby hands on tasks to that go into running a shared life. 1001 grubby hands on tasks? but you only specified one that's maybe daily (car-turning) the other four are occasional
Els Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 you must not make very much money. If you are disagreeing with me, does that mean that you must not give very many orgasms?
soserious1 Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 1001 grubby hands on tasks? but you only specified one that's maybe daily (car-turning) the other four are occasional Among my partnered colleagues, the trend I see most often is that of the primary bread winner who scurries home to do " their fair share" of cooking & cleaning. It's like they need to apologize & bend over backwards in order to minimize & downplay their contribution to the family. Their reward? protest, complaint, resentment & " not tonight dear, I have a headache" I will NEVER subsidize the lifestyle of an able bodied adult ever again, there is no reward in it that I can see.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 3, 2012 Posted April 3, 2012 Put it another way: I have had the great fortune of landing an awesome job 3,000 miles away. They're going to cover my moving costs, and my salary is going to allow me to live in a pretty nice part of town. This opportunity came out of nowhere, so in order for my girlfriend whom I love and cherish to come with me, she's going to have to quit her job and come out on the whim, and I'm going to have to pay for the both of us until she can get a job. Wait. I thought she was dumping you for some weirdo? And what about Junior?
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 3, 2012 Posted April 3, 2012 I don't care what the answer is... and many of the answers given are not wrong. I just want to express how impressed I am with the extra effort to which you went to describe the thing without bias (as would be there had you identified which was which in the beginning post).
Author pacardi Posted April 3, 2012 Author Posted April 3, 2012 I don't care what the answer is... and many of the answers given are not wrong. I just want to express how impressed I am with the extra effort to which you went to describe the thing without bias (as would be there had you identified which was which in the beginning post). I figured when I posted who was who, that the thread would die off. Guess not! Thanks for the compliment. Nice to see one or two positive remarks after being called "money grubbing" and being told... "hope your girlfriend bangs some hot dude behind your back." I very intentionally tried to describe things as fairly possible. An honest difference of opinion does not make me "money grubbing." As we've seen, many people here believe that both "equal, 50/50" and "equitable, not 50/50" are perfectly valid solutions. Many of those who accept the "equitable, not 50/50" solution are on the high end of their respective financial situations; being on the bottom end does not mean I instantly become "money grubbing." If I expected her to pay all of my bills while I do nothing; or if I expected her to buy me alcohol, new clothes, and another puppy; or if I expected her to do the cleaning and walk the dog, while I played video games all day, then "money grubbing" would be fair. But that's not the case. I have a job. I'm prepared to pay 50/50 for the sake of the relationship. I do most of the cleaning. And I buy my own clothes. Indeed, several people indicated the expectation was the key part. There was no expectation at all. It's not as though I said, "Pay this or we're breaking up." On the contrary, I said, "This is what I think is fair. You don't agree? Okay, why not?" As I indicated earlier, it very much does come down to values. I want to live in a nice place and save a little money; she would rather live in a more modest place and save a little extra money. Ultimately, as I indicated, I will probably end up matching her contribution for the sake of getting the slightly better place, which she will benefit from (safety, comfort, hardwood floors), even if it's more than she required. And I will still do more house work, pay for more of the day to day food, and cook more frequently. And you know what? That's fine with me if it works out generally fairly. I don't hold it over her. It's about coming up with a situation that makes sense. In fact, I don't think it's all about money in the least. If I had more money, I would definitely pay a little more than I expected my SO to (sure, it's easy to say, but it's true.) I've always been very generous and contribute as much as possible. Growing up, I started paying a lot of my own bills (clothes, gas money, school supplies, etc.) at age 14 because my parents didn't have a lot of cash. It doesn't mean she's not generous; it simply means that she worries about things, and right now she is worried about having enough money and still being able to save as much cash as she'd like. It's a commendable goal to save some cash. If we end up in a less expensive place, I'll be able to save a little extra too, and that's exactly how I'll look at it. But simply suggesting that she might pay a little extra because she makes more money does not make me money grubbing, even if I would prefer living in a nicer apartment. That's only the case if I demand a nicer apartment while I contribute a significantly lower amount. But that's not it at all. I suggested what seemed to me a fair solution... but I ended up doing (or will do) something totally different because I'd rather compromise and make her/us happy. Given that you generally sound like a reasonable person, I am frankly surprised that you insisted on your choice of housing in the past, while paying significantly less than half (your words). It just isn't something that someone decent would do IMO, being partially funded by someone else but insisting on their own choice instead of giving the other person the final say. I am even more surprised that she went with it. Granted, this is less of an issue now since you're paying nearly the same amount, but she's understandably wary. I continue to see both sides of the discussion. She is probably right to be wary of the situation. She should have gotten more say the last time we moved. She shouldn't have had to live in a place that was her second or third choice. On the other hand, she later admitted it was the best option, even though it was a little more than she wanted to pay. Ideally, we would have continued looking for a place we both agreed was our first choice. Cut the rent down the middle. You agree on a single place to live TOGETHER. You will share the bills, 50/50. If this isn't the definition of fair, I do not know what is. I still can't help but feel that this is a very black and white way of looking at it. It doesn't recognize the nuance of the situation (or any situation) and it allows no room for gray area. What if one partner does lose a job? By the logic above, it's a very unfair situation and the partner who retains a job would be right to kick out the partner who lost the job. But everyone recognizes that such a situation would be very unfair indeed. I really don't see why some people are so hung up on financial stuff, tbh. It's just one issue of a shared partnership, just like any other. Do people count and make sure that each partner gets exactly the same number of orgasms a month and the same intensity? That each partner does exactly 50% of house chores? That each partner is the one to back down and apologize 50% of the time in arguments? I think this is how I viewed it. I like to save money, and I like to live within my means, but insisting on a precise 50/50 split based on principal alone, without any consideration to nuance, threatens to take over a relationship. We've always been very relaxed about money in every other respect. We try to keep things fair, i.e, on vacation, "If you pay for breakfast and lunch, I'll pay for a nice dinner," so it's roughly equitable without being precisely equal. Or, "I know money's a little tight for you right now, I'll pay the heating bill if you pay the water bill." I figured the discussion about rent would follow a similar trajectory. That's not to say it won't, but for reasons already mentioned, the rent discussion is more sensitive to her and will have to be handled more delicately. Admittedly, I would do well to keep that in mind.
Recommended Posts