How can you ask such an obvious question? A girlfriend for only 70 dollars a month? obvious answer: Yes!
How can you ask such an obvious question? A girlfriend for only 70 dollars a month? obvious answer: Yes!
"Even if you were to leave out any religious concerns, why would you live with someone you weren't willing to marry? If you truly love her, then marry her. If you don't, then why would you want to live with her?"
The opposite is true as well. Why would you not want to live with someone when you are not quite ready to marry yet (for whatever reason)?
"As is, you're preventing her from getting on with her life."
Is he? Seems to me she can perfectly well make that decision. Not everyone needs to get married to feel they are "getting on with their life". If she does, then she can make that known to him and decide what to do about it.
"It appears that you just want commitment free sex, all the while bickering over the price. That makes you a child and not a man. "
Plenty of couples who do not live together have sex. And they need to decide who pays for the meals out, or the movie. He did not say he was bickering - just asking for opinions (which you certainly gave).
"Besides the fact that studies have suggested that couples who cohabitate before marriage have poorer outcomes than those who don't."
Is that causation or correlation? Did you studies factor in religious background? Economic? Etc. People who believe is wrong to live together first are more likely to believe that divorce is wrong too. With divorce rates at 50% already, it does not take a whole lot to make this a correlation over a causation.
I've been married more than 20 years. We lived together for a year first. I'd do that same all over again if I had to. I don't suggest it for everyone, because we are all different in our views. I will say, I might not have married someone who felt it was wrong to live together first. That would be a red flag that we might not be compatible.
There are several ways to think about this:
1) if you were just roommates then it'd be a clean 50/50 split
2) if you were married you'd do one one 3 things:
a) one big account which pays everything.
b) split everything 50/50.
c) do exactly as your girlfriend suggests - split based on income. In marriage this is considered more fair than b (and you
are not going with one big account).
So the question is how committed in the relationship. Do you feel more like roommates who happen to like (or love) each other. Or more like like partners who have not made the final commitment. If the later, then I think your girlfriends proposal is the right way to go. It is more fair in a committed relationship.
I don't think that it is necessary to confuse the issues of allocating expenses and having separate bank accounts. I have been with my wife for over 15 years and married for almost 13. My wife and I have always had separate bank accounts.
For the first 5 years of our relationship, I made more than my wife, but not a ton more. When we lived together in the house I bought before we got married, I covered the mortgage because it was my house. I could have asked for a contribution from her, but I decided not to. Same deal when I sold that house and she bought her house. She paid the mortgage and I didn't pay any of it. We had separate bank accounts the entire time
For the last 10 years or so, my wife has been a stay at home mom and has had no income. We still have separate bank accounts, although I fund her account through a combination of a lump sum transfer and monthly transfers.
Neither of us has much input on what the other spends, and when we do give each other input, it is usually encouragement to the other to spend a little more on themselves from time to time. Big ticket items, like the home we bought together, what car to buy, vacations, new appliances, etc. are all discussed and agreed on together in advance.
The real key to this kind of arrangement working is that she and I see eye-to-eye on our financial priorities. We both agree that we should avoid debt and quickly pay it down when we do accrue it, prioritize our mortgage payments and retirement accounts, establishing a savings cushion for unforeseen expenses, and only then do we spend on things like vacations, nice clothing, eating out and similar discretionary expenditures if there is enough left over when the priority items are addressed.
If we didn't share the same priorities, it would be a mess, but then again, we might not have ended up together in the first place, because I think that shared values are an important part of a successful relationship.
Smoove wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary to confuse the issues of allocating expenses and having separate bank accounts. I have been with my wife for over 15 years and married for almost 13. My wife and I have always had separate bank accounts.
For the first 5 years of our relationship, I made more than my wife, but not a ton more. When we lived together in the house I bought before we got married, I covered the mortgage because it was my house. I could have asked for a contribution from her, but I decided not to. Same deal when I sold that house and she bought her house. She paid the mortgage and I didn't pay any of it. We had separate bank accounts the entire time
For the last 10 years or so, my wife has been a stay at home mom and has had no income. We still have separate bank accounts, although I fund her account through a combination of a lump sum transfer and monthly transfers.
Neither of us has much input on what the other spends, and when we do give each other input, it is usually encouragement to the other to spend a little more on themselves from time to time. Big ticket items, like the home we bought together, what car to buy, vacations, new appliances, etc. are all discussed and agreed on together in advance.
The real key to this kind of arrangement working is that she and I see eye-to-eye on our financial priorities. We both agree that we should avoid debt and quickly pay it down when we do accrue it, prioritize our mortgage payments and retirement accounts, establishing a savings cushion for unforeseen expenses, and only then do we spend on things like vacations, nice clothing, eating out and similar discretionary expenditures if there is enough left over when the priority items are addressed.
If we didn't share the same priorities, it would be a mess, but then again, we might not have ended up together in the first place, because I think that shared values are an important part of a successful relationship.
Thanks for this! Will save for future years as this is all good stuff
Get a lawyer and settle this in court.
The Good Wife wrote:
Get a lawyer and settle this in court.
Lol. I wonder how Judge Judy would rule on this.
I think this could only be fair if you split the house's space 55/45 per your agreement. You get 55% of the bed, the fridge, you get 55% more orgasms, ect. All in the name of fairness.
Serious question, are you married to Bernie Sanders?
I forgot how her earning less is somehow your fault that you need to take responsibility for. I know the extra $80/month could be seen as dumb thing to fight about, but if it was, then she wouldn't bother bringing up this type of agreement. It's not the $80 that I would disagree with, but I just don't like the precedent it sets. If you're both working, then why not both take the same responsibiltiy for the bills?
AITA wrote:
So I earn 9k more than my girlfriend ($43k for her, $52k for me). We're both on the same banking graduate scheme, but she's in a department that pays less than mine - our work hours and difficulty are pretty much the same. The rent is 800 dollars each, and she thinks I should pay proportionally for rent (so 870, while she pays 730). She doesn't want to split other bills that way, just rent, so we would pay equal amounts for everything else. I think we should pay the same for rent because although we do the same level of work I do earn more so should be able to spend my extra cash on hobbies, races etc. Her argument is that this is just rent we'd do that way, and staying in the flat we're in is financially affecting her more than it is me.
What do you think?
9/10. The troll is strong with this one.
If you care about her, go the extra mile and cough up the $70.
But if you're not so sure and have your eye on other women, tell her
it's even Steven or she's going to be evicted.
Let it Rupp wrote:
I think this could only be fair if you split the house's space 55/45 per your agreement. You get 55% of the bed, the fridge, you get 55% more orgasms, ect. All in the name of fairness.
Serious question, are you married to Bernie Sanders?
He probably is taller and bulkier than her, so 55% works there.
He probably eats more than her, so there goes 55% of the fridge.
And she probably fakes it sometimes, so 55% to the orgasms too.
If you intend to marry her, then you should take it normally. You're not going to have a showdown every time because of this. Give in to her and the problem will be solved, although you do not have to. These housing issues are always very tedious. I've made it easier for myself with what I use prorated rent calculator. Thanks to this calculator, all questions and problems related to the rental of housing are solved very quickly. I hope you can resolve this situation, and I wish you good luck.
_____________________________________________
Have fun marrying this one. You and her are both divorce bait. If she made more money than you, she would leave you automatically.