Women having "running away money"

whydoibother?

Chinafoot wrote: »

This is an entirely different discussion though.

The question was "how many here would be annoyed to discover their partner (husband, wife, whatever) had an account with €5,000+ in it being kept hidden from them?"

Ok, .

I would be annoyed to discover that a partner had an account with a lot of money in it that was being kept hidden from me because:

Firstly, while 50-50 splits are the nicest idea, they are not always appropriate, and we would need to know what both of us had, in order to work out what was fair in my opinion.

Secondly, I would be annoyed because people live according to their means, it may be appropriate to spend more on joint expenses if you have more. I'm not talking about some golddigger wanting to know about a partners savings so they can update their car every six months at the others expense. It could be stuff like whether to create a college fund for the kids, whether to have private health insurance for the family etc. It could be whether to get a bigger house if it were needed or whether to expand the family business - things for the family, as opposed to the individual. That stuff has to be planned. Whatever income level you're at from low to very high, there is always the potential to spend more to improve family life - not that I'm advocating reckless spending.

I really don't see how I went off topic and answered a different question. I think they are valid reasons to be annoyed.

Chinafoot

whydoibother? wrote: »

Ok, .

I would be annoyed to discover that a partner had an account with a lot of money in it that was being kept hidden from me because:

Firstly, while 50-50 splits are the nicest idea, they are not always appropriate, and we would need to know what both of us had, in order to work out what was fair in my opinion.

How much do you think the person with the "running away" money is putting aside every week/month? In my experience, and those that I know who have these accounts, it is not an amount that is going to impact on the finances required for their joint expenses. Personally I work in a job that I enjoy but which currently pays rather poorly. I put anything from €10 to €50 a month into my savings account. Do you want to account for every cent your partner has coming into their current account?

whydoibother? wrote: »

Secondly, I would be annoyed because people live according to their means, it may be appropriate to spend more on joint expenses if you have more.

That is a decision for individual couples. I make less than my partner does but that does not mean I can't afford my share of the rent/bills/enjoyment. The fact that I make less money does not mean I use less electricity/heating/hot water, eat less food, wash my clothes less often. I believe that my relationship should be equal and I am thankfully in a position to have that.

whydoibother? wrote: »

I'm not talking about some golddigger wanting to know about a partners savings so they can update their car every six months at the others expense. It could be stuff like whether to create a college fund for the kids, whether to have private health insurance for the family etc. It could be whether to get a bigger house if it were needed or whether to expand the family business - things for the family, as opposed to the individual. That stuff has to be planned. Whatever income level you're at from low to very high, there is always the potential to spend more to improve family life - not that I'm advocating reckless spending.

And again, these are all things that can be saved for jointly while the people in the relationship can still have their own money put aside. I have already said that I have no issue with my partner having a private savings account once the joint expenses are covered and he is not shirking his financial responsibilities in order to save private money and this includes things like health insurance, college funds etc. It again comes down to how much you think is being put aside by the people in question.

whydoibother? wrote: »

I really don't see how I went off topic and answered a different question. I think they are valid reasons to be annoyed.

In your opinion. We can agree to disagree.

whydoibother?

Chinafoot wrote: »

How much do you think the person with the "running away" money is putting aside every week/month? In my experience, and those that I know who have these accounts, it is not an amount that is going to impact on the finances required for their joint expenses. Personally I work in a job that I enjoy but which currently pays rather poorly. I put anything from €10 to €50 a month into my savings account. Do you want to account for every cent your partner has coming into their current account?



That is a decision for individual couples. I make less than my partner does but that does not mean I can't afford my share of the rent/bills/enjoyment. The fact that I make less money does not mean I use less electricity/heating/hot water, eat less food, wash my clothes less often. I believe that my relationship should be equal and I am thankfully in a position to have that.



And again, these are all things that can be saved for jointly while the people in the relationship can still have their own money put aside. I have already said that I have no issue with my partner having a private savings account once the joint expenses are covered and he is not shirking his financial responsibilities in order to save private money and this includes things like health insurance, college funds etc. It again comes down to how much you think is being put aside by the people in question.



In your opinion. We can agree to disagree.

All your points are based on the assumption that the money kept secretly won't be very much and therefore are invalid in my opinion because there is a possiblity that it could be.

seenitall

whydoibother? wrote: »

All your points are based on the assumption that the money kept secretly won't be very much and therefore are invalid in my opinion because there is a possiblity that it could be.

Invalid? Not in the least. Chinafoot's posts make perfect sense to me.

My money is mine, his money is his (a fictitious "he" at the mo), and joint expenses are shared 50/50. I don't care if he has millions (and some men I've been with in the past were actual millionaires - the perils of dating rich guys are for another thread altogether! :pac:) on his bank account/s, it's none of my concern and none of my business; especially so as I am, eh, the opposite of wealthy and expect to always be. And he really shouldn't care about what's in my bank account either.

My marraige was based on this principle too, and whatever problems we had or whatever split us up, it certainly wasn't money.

Where I come from there is a saying: "settled accounts (with each other) will mean a lasting love". Might seem unromantic, but suits the modern world down to the ground, IMO, and all the better for it.

... so really, I'd have no concept of "running away money". I understand why it would be used, but times are changing, thank heavens.

Chinafoot

whydoibother? wrote: »

All your points are based on the assumption that the money kept secretly won't be very much and therefore are invalid in my opinion because there is a possiblity that it could be.

Not invalid in the slightest. Sure, it could be a large amount of money if the person putting the money away makes a very large amount of money. Its all relative. You seem to be of the opinion that the person who makes more in a relationship should pay more towards the relationship. Thats your own opinion and something I completely disagree with.

For me, joint expenses should be 50/50 and "running away" money can be kept once those joint expenses including saving for agreed goals like college funds, a bigger house, etc are not being neglected. If you decide that you or your partner should be putting all of their extra income into these joint goals then fine for you. It doesn't make those who choose not to do so wrong or disrespectful or distrusting.

Its the secret hidden aspect that is at the hard of the matter and that applies to both men an woman.

whydoibother?

Chinafoot wrote: »

Not invalid in the slightest. Sure, it could be a large amount of money if the person putting the money away makes a very large amount of money. Its all relative. You seem to be of the opinion that the person who makes more in a relationship should pay more towards the relationship. Thats your own opinion and something I completely disagree with.

For me, joint expenses should be 50/50 and "running away" money can be kept once those joint expenses including saving for agreed goals like college funds, a bigger house, etc are not being neglected. If you decide that you or your partner should be putting all of their extra income into these joint goals then fine for you. It doesn't make those who choose not to do so wrong or disrespectful or distrusting.

I never said that the person earning more should pay more towards the relationship. In fact one of the first points I made was that 50-50 is the nicest way to do it. Please do not make assumptions about what I think without at least reading my posts, and I'd appreciate it if you could stop repeatedly telling me what my opinion is. I only think the person earning more should pay more where the difference is very significant and relevant (i.e. the less well-off partner would struggle).

Joint goals change depending on how much money there is. Are you telling me that if a really wealthy person goes out with a penniless partner, it's still 50-50? What happens when the very wealthy partner wants to enjoy their money and go on holiday (a really expensive holiday)? Do they go alone? Does the other get a loan to pay their half? Does the rich partner have to make do with a really short, cheap option? Or heaven forbid, does the richer partner pay? I'm just being realistic about what happens all the time.

astrofool

I dunno Chinafoot, it sounds very pie in the sky. You'd be fine with your partner saving €5000+ and then going and splashing it out on a sports car/big tv/nice suit/football season ticket, and not consulting you about it?

And I guess if the account is hidden, you'd be fine with the proceeds of that account being hidden from you as well?

I dunno, I couldn't see a relationship where "what's mine is mine" is in effect, getting very far.

seenitall

whydoibother? wrote: »

Joint goals change depending on how much money there is. Are you telling me that if a really wealthy person goes out with a penniless partner, it's still 50-50? What happens when the very wealthy partner wants to enjoy their money and go on holiday (a really expensive holiday)? Do they go alone? Does the other get a loan to pay their half? Does the rich partner have to make do with a really short, cheap option? Or heaven forbid, does the richer partner pay? I'm just being realistic about what happens all the time.

Heaven forbid indeed. If I may answer this; it's not very workable, in my experience. That's why you have a good few threads in the PI/RI where resentments build around money in relationships; one person resenting having to pay for much more than the other one, or the other person feeling frustrated over not being able to contribute as much as they feel they should. Like I said, I have been in similar scenarios, although granted it never went very long term. BTW, not even going into the issue of some wealthy people having the attitude/expectation that they are effectively buying a relationship. Really wealthy people are so used to buying anything they want, I guess, so throw in a little insecurity about self-worth, and you have a toxic mix. No thanks. I'm never going there again. But that's just my personal preference. I know that kind of imbalance is very realistic and happens all the time, as you say.

@ astrofool: yes on first question, and I don't need stuff being hidden from me, as I have no interest in them anyway (so I wouldn't like the hidden aspect, no). Just as long as all standing responsibilities are being upheld. Which is what Chinafoot is saying, I think. WHY is that so difficult to understand? Why is it a pie in the sky, exactly? Frankly, I'd find not being "fine" with what a partner does with their money difficult to understand.

Chinafoot

whydoibother? wrote: »

I never said that the person earning more should pay more towards the relationship. In fact one of the first points I made was that 50-50 is the nicest way to do it.

You said,

whydoibother? wrote: »

Firstly, while 50-50 splits are the nicest idea, they are not always appropriate, and we would need to know what both of us had, in order to work out what was fair in my opinion.

whydoibother? wrote: »

Secondly, I would be annoyed because people live according to their means, it may be appropriate to spend more on joint expenses if you have more.

whydoibother? wrote: »

Joint goals change depending on how much money there is. Are you telling me that if a really wealthy person goes out with a penniless partner, it's still 50-50? What happens when the very wealthy partner wants to enjoy their money and go on holiday (a really expensive holiday)? Do they go alone? Does the other get a loan to pay their half? Does the rich partner have to make do with a really short, cheap option? Or heaven forbid, does the richer partner pay? I'm just being realistic about what happens all the time.

Ha! Realistic about what happens all the time? You think really wealthy people go out with penniless partners "all the time"? You're taking the extreme scenario to try to make your point. And you called my point "invalid". :rolleyes:

To answer your, quite frankly ridiculous, question, should a very wealthy person choose to pay for everything for their penniless partner they are perfectly fine to do so. That doesn't mean that every penny of their money has to be spent on their penniless partner and can't be kept aside. As I have already said, things like this are up to the individual couples. There is no standard rule here ffs. In my relationship everything is 50/50, in some other relationships it might not be. Thats their choice and if it works for both people then fine.

You say that in order to know how to split things fairly you need to know how much money is available. This basically calls for both people to account for every cent of their partners money. The costs should be calculated and both partners should agree to an amount based on their earnings which is not something people keep hidden from each other (in our case its 50/50) and once those costs are covered people should be entitled to do what they want with whatever they have leftover. If that means buying things for their hobby, leaving it in their current account or sticking it in a personal savings account then that is their decision and their right.

astrofool wrote: »

I dunno Chinafoot, it sounds very pie in the sky. You'd be fine with your partner saving €5000+ and then going and splashing it out on a sports car/big tv/nice suit/football season ticket, and not consulting you about it? And I guess if the account is hidden, you'd be fine with the proceeds of that account being hidden from you as well?

How is it pie in the sky? Of course I'd be fine with it. It is his money. Why is that such a hard concept to grasp? He can do what he likes with it because it belongs to him. Why should he need to consult me. He will have contributed to the household expenses so if he wants to treat himself to a sports car/big tv/nice suit/football season ticket, why shouldn't he?

astrofool wrote: »

I dunno, I couldn't see a relationship where "what's mine is mine" is in effect, getting very far.

Getting very far? We've had this arrangement for almost 7 years and we have never had any issues with money. I am absolutely baffled at how this is so hard for some people to grasp. Nothing is neglected in our relationship money-wise. We have been on lots of holidays, have bought plenty of things for our house and are currently saving for an expensive trip we've always wanted to go on. At the same time, neither of us needs to know how much is in each other's accounts once this is all paid for and nor should we.

seenitall

Chinafoot wrote: »

Ha! Realistic about what happens all the time? You think really wealthy people go out with penniless partners "all the time"?

Ah to be fair Chinafoot, that particular situation happened to me twice, and I am not even a very outgoing person or anything! (Am not exactly penniless, but may as well be if we are talking proportionally.) It's not as uncommon as you'd imagine. Just not very sustainable long-term, unless both people enter into it with an interest in/disregard of the financial imbalance.

As you say, whatever works for any given couple. Your relationship sounds like the kind I always aspire to have, deffo.

pickarooney

What does happen all the time is that one partner loses a job or stops working to look after children. In these cases, "what's mine is mine" is untenable. If the washing machine breaks down, do you wait until the poorer partner has scraped enough together to pay half to get it replaced? Should the richer partner go on holidays on his/her own?

Obviously, when you speak from the point of view of a couple where both are in well-paid jobs it's easy to say WMIM but this is probably the reality of a minority of people.

seenitall

^^ Good point. Which brings us back to a scenario where "running away money" could concievably be needed (in the case of one partner's holding all the financial cards - in a bad relationship, for example).

I just think an imbalance of income/finance like that is so conducive to a general inequality within a relationship. Call me paranoid, I don't mind.

Neyite

One of the bigger turning points in my relationship was when I became unemployed - before this we halved everything in the household. Then I had to learn to lean on him, he had to learn to trust that I wasnt spending all his hard-earned either. Just as I got a job, 2 months later he was out of work so the roles were reversed for another few months.

We were forced to communicate and compromise in our relationship due to a drop in income. Sometimes it wasnt easy, and difficult, sometimes tense, chats were required, but it fostered a deep sense of trust in the other towards each other and our respective monies.

We have each others bank card pins, if I need money I can take it out of his wallet and leave a note, and vice versa. When I go to visit my sister he gives me his credit card "in case I see anything nice" It works for us, but other couples would be horrified at our set-up, and would never do anything but 50-50. Thats their choice, and fair play to them.

Now I'm pregnant and will only get statutory maternity benefit, we will face a drop in income again, but will probably do what we did before.

If he had a secret account, it would not bother me - in fact I am thinking of setting up a secret one too to squirrel away a few quid so that I can get him something when we get engaged sometime in the future.

whydoibother?

Chinafoot wrote: »

You said,

Ha! Realistic about what happens all the time? You think really wealthy people go out with penniless partners "all the time"? You're taking the extreme scenario to try to make your point. And you called my point "invalid". :rolleyes:

To answer your, quite frankly ridiculous, question, should a very wealthy person choose to pay for everything for their penniless partner they are perfectly fine to do so. That doesn't mean that every penny of their money has to be spent on their penniless partner and can't be kept aside. As I have already said, things like this are up to the individual couples. There is no standard rule here ffs. In my relationship everything is 50/50, in some other relationships it might not be. Thats their choice and if it works for both people then fine.

You say that in order to know how to split things fairly you need to know how much money is available. This basically calls for both people to account for every cent of their partners money. The costs should be calculated and both partners should agree to an amount based on their earnings which is not something people keep hidden from each other (in our case its 50/50) and once those costs are covered people should be entitled to do what they want with whatever they have leftover. If that means buying things for their hobby, leaving it in their current account or sticking it in a personal savings account then that is their decision and their right.
.

I have no clue why you quoted the posts that you did from me.

I only chose an extreme example to illustrate my point clearly. The same principles could apply if one partner earned say 50% more than the other and they both had average incomes.

I can't reconcile the two bits in bold.

Chinafoot

pickarooney wrote: »

What does happen all the time is that one partner loses a job or stops working to look after children. In these cases, "what's mine is mine" is untenable. If the washing machine breaks down, do you wait until the poorer partner has scraped enough together to pay half to get it replaced? Should the richer partner go on holidays on his/her own?

Obviously, when you speak from the point of view of a couple where both are in well-paid jobs it's easy to say WMIM but this is probably the reality of a minority of people.

And how many times do you want me to say that it is up to the couples involved. I do think that holidays should be something that both people can afford. This is living within your means. If you fancy a mega-expensive holiday knowing that your partner can't afford it then I think you're being quite selfish tbh. If you are willing to pay the cost then go for it, but make sure your partner is comfortable with that. Personally I wouldn't be. If you feel that you are missing out on things because your partner makes less money, find someone who can match you financially.

I also said

If something were to happen that required the use of our individual savings such as job losses/illness then of course that money would be used. Its not a case of "no, it's mine, you're not getting it!"

texas star

well ive read alot of post the last few days,so dont want to get eaten for what i say, from my own experience my mam has alwasy told me to have my runaway money and she happily married to my dad all my life and im 36.Like alot of people have said i dont see anything wrong with having a little keep sake money,who know whats around the corner;)

pickarooney

Chinafoot wrote: »

And how many times do you want me to say that it is up to the couples involved.

Just the once, if you didn't follow if up every time with what reads like definitive rules for relationships. Maybe you don't mean it that way, but I don't seem to be the only one who who's confused by your apparently contradicting standpoints of 'do what you want' but 'this is what you should do'.

berzo

RUN AWAY MOM
Its just called running away money but you can call it what you like... i am nearly 40 years married and my mother too advised me to have a little stash on the qt. It has gotten us out of trouble sooo many times. Like when the car broke down..the washing machine packed up or we had to visit the doctor or we had an unexpected invitation that we had to fund . It is basically a little bit of money squirrelled away from my housekeeping through being thrifty. To be honest my stash wouldn't get me further than a couple of nights in an hotel so I wont be running very far , My husband know its there but not how much and he wouldnt ask anyway . But he has had reason to appreciate it over the years.