Net Worth

[GreenGoo]

It should be noted that the only time we have any sort of discussion that implies that she is doing anything sub-optimally is when we are being sued for 10's of thousands of dollars. Otherwise just attempting to "get into her business" is met with resentment, anger, defensiveness, rationalization and often reversals and accusations. Much of this I let slide because as I suggested earlier, I can't always be relied on and sometimes she has to make her way without me. When I *can* be relied on and I try to help in ways that I am good at and can focus on, well, you can imagine how that goes.

I think of it like forcing someone to fend for themselves and then appearing to criticize how poorly they've done. That's not how it is but that's the closest thing I can think of for how she might feel about things. Of course this makes me feel ashamed for not being there all the time and therefore more willing to accept that this is just the way things are.

Communication. Not our strong point.

[GreenGoo]

If it seems I'm defensive it's because I am. I'm willing to accept some of the blame and some of the responsibility, but the bottom line is that my wife can't spend less than she makes and that pisses me off.

If we're living past our means then fine, we need to trim things down to a quality of life that matches our income. *My* quality of life is already far below what I make, so yeah, I'm bitter.

[Isgrimnur]

It should be noted that the only time we have any sort of discussion that implies that she is doing anything sub-optimally is when we are being sued for 10's of thousands of dollars. Otherwise just attempting to "get into her business" is met with resentment, anger, defensiveness, rationalization and often reversals and accusations.

That ship has sailed, ran aground, and burst into flames. Someone that gets you sued doesn’t get to be justified in being angry at questions about those affairs without at least a years-long clean track record.

[GreenGoo]

It should be noted that the only time we have any sort of discussion that implies that she is doing anything sub-optimally is when we are being sued for 10's of thousands of dollars. Otherwise just attempting to "get into her business" is met with resentment, anger, defensiveness, rationalization and often reversals and accusations.

That ship has sailed, ran aground, and burst into flames. Someone that gets you sued doesn’t get to be justified in being angry at questions about those affairs without at least a years-long clean track record.

You would think, right?

The first time this happened just about ended us. We were much younger and didn't have the income and weren't as established as we are now. There were no kids. No mortgage. I broke things. I spent weeks looking for a way out (of our financial problems) and eventually had to borrow from my mother which saved us the interest at least.

She was contrite for almost 2 months back then.

This time she was contrite for about 2 days. She has been contrite off and on for brief moments since then. Otherwise, it's just business as usual. It really has just become the norm and Rmn9 is right (not that I needed to be reminded) and this will happen again.

Some time between the 2nd and 3rd time this happened I decided that my marriage was worth more to me than the money and I basically accepted that I would need to be ready to bail us out again. I sure as fuck didn't tell her that though. Obviously she still picked up on it. Probably from the fact that I stopped being angry and didn't divorce her.

This is the first time we've been sued though. So that's new.

It is my opinion that after years of experience and review, we are seriously dysfunctional. We are a bad match and I don't know what keeps us together. Lethargy, inertia, vague affection, the kids, my autistic son who needs a stable and supportive home environment more than most kids is about all I can come up with. She claims she still loves me but for god's sake I can't figure out why.

She's a good person and a good wife. She's just not great at relationships. I'm a good person, a bad husband and pretty decent at relationships, but I've mostly stopped trying (to have a relationship) in this one.

Lastly, I don't give a crap about money. I really don't. A roof, food and some other bare necessities are all I need, most of the time. I resent that I have to care about money more than I want to. If the kids ever leave the house and my wife and I are are not together for whatever reason, I often think I could just live alone in a cabin in the woods, as long as it had decent internet.

[RunningMn9]

Alright, good luck to you.

[GreenGoo]

Alright, good luck to you.

That's all I ever wanted from you, Mr fixer. Most of the time that's all anyone wants.

And come on dude, taking your ball and going home when there is pushback on your wisdom?

Participate or not, engage or not. It's a discussion and there is bound to be disagreement. If you feel that your opinions are sacrosanct, that's a shame.

I don't like my (very common and reasonable) viewpoint being labelled as self deluding fiction. Who would?

[RunningMn9]

I’m not interested in arguing with you about this. It’s your life, manage it however you please.

[GreenGoo]

It’s your life, manage it however you please.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that was always going to be the case. Just as it is with everyone on these forums all the time. Surely you never thought otherwise? Why did you bother getting involved if you were just going to walk way the moment I didn't agree with you about something?

Geezus dude.

[Smoove_B]

Lastly, I don't give a crap about money. I really don't. A roof, food and some other bare necessities are all I need, most of the time. I resent that I have to care about money more than I want to.

I think that is the key and why you're getting the "good luck" sentiment. Nobody - nobody cares more about my money than I do. Nobody. And when I say "my money", I mean, the money that's flowing through my household. From what you've shared, you seemingly care about your money - at least insofar as how your money (i.e. your paycheck) is paying for things in your household. Again, from what you've presented you're ok with whatever your spouse is doing with her money, assuming that it's meeting your agreed-upon family/household obligations and you're not being sued by a bank.

It's not an indictment against you (or anyone) that keeps separate spousal financial arrangements - I just don't get it. Understand that from my point of view it doesn't make sense as the account structures you've created are arbitrary and imaginary (at least from a legal standpoint). I fully and completely understand it works for some people - maybe even many or most. I don't understand how or why, but if it works, it works. Super.

I think you'd agree it's not working here. If you then circle back and state you don't give a crap about money, well...then...I'm going to guess 12, 16 or 18 months from now something similar is going to happen again.

IMHO you and your spouse need to start figuring out how to care about money -or- accept that this cycle will repeat. Again, I wish I had practical advice for you, but sometimes when I talk to people about money it's quickly apparent that my views aren't compatible with theirs and just as I can't understand them, they can't understand me. I can only tell people what works for me. From what I've read, Kraken has shared what is seemingly the closest to what works for him, though his story isn't even completely identical as they have no dependents (which changes quite a bit).

Have you considered sending Drazzil a PM? From what I understand, he's looking to launder some cash.

[Blackhawk]

I've known a lot of people that use the 'separate' system, but I've never understood it. Especially when you hear something like, "I'm barely scraping by, but my wife is raking it in." That thinking is utterly foreign to me. Again, it can work for some, because I've seen it work for people. I just can't imagine being that way myself.

[GreenGoo]

First, thanks for engaging. Second, it's clear that we don't see everything the same way, and that's fine. Let me response to some of the details in your post.

Lastly, I don't give a crap about money. I really don't. A roof, food and some other bare necessities are all I need, most of the time. I resent that I have to care about money more than I want to.

I think that is the key and why you're getting the "good luck" sentiment. Nobody - nobody cares more about my money than I do. Nobody. And when I say "my money", I mean, the money that's flowing through my household. From what you've shared, you seemingly care about your money - at least insofar as how your money (i.e. your paycheck) is paying for things in your household. Again, from what you've presented you're ok with whatever your spouse is doing with her money, assuming that it's meeting your agreed-upon family/household obligations and you're not being sued by a bank.

I care about money in the same way I care about being alive. If I'm alive, that's good enough. As I said, I care about a roof. I care about food. I care about some other bare necessities, like internet. Without money it becomes very hard to stay alive in NA. So I care. In the same way I care that I eat. I don't care about having a shiny new car. I don't care about a bigger paycheque. I care that if I don't have money I'm on the street.

I care that my wife is making me care more than that. I care that my wife is a sinking anchor and I'm tied to it. So yeah, I care, but about as little as is possible and still maintain a job, mortgage and food.

When I said I didn't care, I said I cared about the necessities. Then you suggest that I clearly care because I care about necessities. I already said that. I absolutely don't care what my wife does with her income as long as we aren't being served and the bills are being paid. In fact I don't want to know.

It's not an indictment against you (or anyone) that keeps separate spousal financial arrangements - I just don't get it. Understand that from my point of view it doesn't make sense as the account structures you've created are arbitrary and imaginary (at least from a legal standpoint). I fully and completely understand it works for some people - maybe even many or most. I don't understand how or why, but if it works, it works. Super.

I think you'd agree it's not working here. If you then circle back and state you don't give a crap about money, well...then...I'm going to guess 12, 16 or 18 months from now something similar is going to happen again.

And I don't get what is so confusing for you, but that's fine. I'm not suggesting you're doing it wrong, or worse, that you're lying to yourself in thinking not dividing the responsibilities is a fool's approach. I took exception to what I found an insulting characterization of the arrangement. An arrangement that many, many people employ without issue. That Rmn9 doesn't understand it and disapproves not withstanding, that's clearly not the issue. One of us has to pay the bills. Each individual bill is not a two man job. Whether we divvy up the workload or leave it all to one person doesn't magically make things harder or easier. We've divided up the responsibility. That's all. That's a totally normal approach to responsibilities, including the responsibility of paying bills.

It is not working here, but that's not the fault of the approach. It's true I don't care about money and it's true that that's why this is the 4th time this has happened. Well that's not completely true. This happens because my wife is incapable of managing money, period. Sure I can treat her like a child and manage all the money for us, but I don't want to. Because I don't give a crap about money and managing it on a daily basis sucks for me. I don't think asking her not to spend us into a lawsuit is asking too much of her. Clearly some of you feel differently.

Sure I should stop a grown woman from banging her head against the wall until she bleeds, but it's not MY FAULT that she's banging her head against the wall. At what point does she bear some responsibility?

IMHO you and your spouse need to start figuring out how to care about money -or- accept that this cycle will repeat. Again, I wish I had practical advice for you, but sometimes when I talk to people about money it's quickly apparent that my views aren't compatible with theirs and just as I can't understand them, they can't understand me. I can only tell people what works for me. From what I've read, Kraken has shared what is seemingly the closest to what works for him, though his story isn't even completely identical as they have no dependents (which changes quite a bit).

As much as I don't care about money, I have all the skills necessary to manage it quite successfully, as evidenced by...well, our wealth. I feel that spending no more than you make is a pretty easy rule to live by. I get that many people can't, and I get that my wife is one of them. That makes me bitter because...just don't fucking spend money once you have none!

I've put a lot of my life on display and I expect and deserve criticism. If I decide some criticism is unfair or that some advice is not great, that's my prerogative. If I feel insulted and push back over what is essentially a minor quibble and Rmn9 decides that if everything he says isn't accepted as gospel and helping wasn't really what he was here for in the first place so he's going to sanctimoniously walk away, well that's on him.

He suggested something that I found insulting. I pushed back. He took his ball and went home. Lame.

[Smoove_B]

FWIW, I don't think that's what happened here. My impression (right or wrong) isn't that you're being judged or evaluated in any way. In fact, many have indicated they can relate to your experiences and/or at least understand where you're at. The frustration instead is when suggestions or observations are made and you seemingly either double-down or disregard them as irrelevant or meaningless. To be clear, that's fine too - it's your right to dismiss anything said. But I'd hope you can appreciate how that might be frustrating.

Regardless, I don't think anyone is judging you, your situation or even your wife.

[GreenGoo]

FWIW, I don't think that's what happened here. My impression (right or wrong) isn't that you're being judged or evaluated in any way. In fact, many have indicated they can relate to your experiences and/or at least understand where you're at. The frustration instead is when suggestions or observations are made and you seemingly either double-down or disregard them as irrelevant or meaningless. To be clear, that's fine too - it's your right to dismiss anything said. But I'd hope you can appreciate how that might be frustrating.

Regardless, I don't think anyone is judging you, your situation or even your wife.

That's fair Smoove, but give me a break. I've pushed back exactly ONE TIME. About one very specific characterization that I disagree with. You make it sound like good advice is coming my way and I'm refusing to accept any of it, or any criticism, or any responsibility, and that's simply not true.

Not that I would wish this on anyone, but go back and re-read the thread (well, starting with my complaint). Tell me again how I'm doubling down or disregarding ANYTHING except this one thing.

I get that you feel I am burying my head in the sand, but that's not the case. Do you have specifics in mind? Because I am *more* than willing to re-evaluate literally anything you find that matches your description. If I'm blind to my own refusal to listen, I'll happily work on opening my eyes to things that they've been closed to up until now.

I'm not being facetious. You (or anyone) that has specifics where I'm refusing good advice or dismissing it out of hand please let me know so I can return to it in the hopes of benefiting from it.

If I had planned on ignoring everyone, I wouldn't have bothered sharing in the first place.

P.S. Obviously don't bother with the separation of bills, as it should be clear that I simply don't agree with this one, specific characterization that it is a strategy doomed to failure.

[GreenGoo]

Regardless, I don't think anyone is judging you, your situation or even your wife.

And I don't feel under attack or that people are judging, although I was mentally prepared for it if it happened in any case. You don't put the personal details of your life on the internet and expect everyone will be your friend.

I took exception to the idea that divvying up financial responsibilities is fiction. I made it clear why I have a problem with that view, and if I was defensive in the way I did it, well cut me some slack. I'm not here because I'm in a good place, but neither am I so inept at this that I won't take my own council at times.

My wife uses too much unsecured debt without managing it properly which gets us into trouble. Tell me that isn't a very common problem on a continent where credit cards are a way of life. Americans are carrying over 1 trillion in credit card debt alone. The idea that this is because people decide one partner will pay these bills and the other partner will pay those bills is a little crazy in that context.

[Smoove_B]

I took exception to the idea that divvying up financial responsibilities is fiction. I made it clear why I have a problem with that view, and if I was defensive in the way I did it, well cut me some slack. I'm not here because I'm in a good place, but neither am I so inept at this that I won't take my own council at times.

This might be the issue then. Maybe it's terminology or phrasing or maybe it's actual confusion. To clarify -- how I (and some others) view things, diving up financials is an arbitrary distinction as all monies coming in and out are part of a legal partnership.

I struggle to understand any couple that tells me (and I've heard it) that one person pays the electrical and phone bill while the other pays the mortgage and cable bill (or whatever). To accomplish this they apparently have their own accounts and simply "take care of it" on their end -or- they each pay money into a joint account that one or both write checks out of to pay the bills they have designated themselves responsible for. Again, if that works for you (collective), that's terrific. I had roommates in college and this is how we handled things. Electrical bill? 4 way split. Rent? 4 way split. Cost to have the phone? 4 way split. Actual calls made? You're on your own. Food? Touch my stuff and I'll break your fingers.

Anyway, back to the present, the wife and I have two accounts - a checking account and a savings account. I pay 100% of the bills from the checking account because that's how we do it. She's capable of paying 100% of the bills (the actual act of paying the bills), but I'd say I'm more organized and on top of things to make sure they would get paid. It's not that I don't trust her to do so or that she's incapable.

She earns 75% of our household income. I can't possibly imagine a world where I look at my 25% contribution to our household finances and somehow pro-rate what I earn to figure out what my obligation should be to the electrical bill or the mortgage and then the rest of my money is mine, mine, mine. Again, I completely understand that there are couples that do this, and if it works for them, terrific. If you (collective) have figured out some type of magical black box accounting protocol that takes care of the bills and all parties are satisfied (and all the bills are being paid), that's awesome.

However, when the system breaks (as I think you've admitted it has), you're seemingly now in a position where the affected parties are lining up on either side of the equation and trying to justify how you're both in a position where a bank is serving you legal papers. From your end, you've been paying whatever bills you're responsible for and up until now, had assumed she was paying the bills she was responsible for. This is where it all breaks down for me as I cannot imagine being in a discussion where my spouse is telling me she earns 75% of the household money so I have no right to communicate how I think it should be spent (paying bills, for example).

This is also where I throw my hands in the air because I'm at a loss as to what to say or what advice to offer for couples or individuals that think or operate in this manner. It would be like me offering advice to a parent on how to handle having 4 kids or what to do to keep from strangling your MIL because she lives with you. I have no idea what to say because I have no perspective to offer.

That being said, I do believe (again IMHO) that these types of problems exist when people believe things are one way ("our finances are separate") but in reality they are another ("you are legally partners"). In other words, the idea of separate finances works great until it doesn't. I honestly cannot say what would happen if I opened the mail today and saw a notice from a bank that my wife had been secretly accruing thousands (or 10s of thousands) worth of debt and I'm being sued. First, where the hell did all the money go? What did those 10s of thousands of dollars buy? The answer to those questions would get to the next element of the decision tree, mainly how is this never happening again?

Again, I said it a page or so ago: I'm really sorry and I hope you both can figure this out, because to me it would be a mortal blow.

[GreenGoo]

Thanks for responding.

First, I had hoped that Rmn9 would push back so we could have a dialogue. Instead he took his ball and went home. While it is everyone's right to decide when to engage or disengage, I found Rmn9's "there's no helping him" tone to be particularly vexing. Because it's complete bullshit. The forums aren't here to just to provide an audience for people and "I'm struggling with this" threads don't exist for the sole purpose of lecturing a person. I'm happy to listen to advice and am more than willing to participate in a discussion. I think it's a good reminder however, that not having the problem the author has does not make you a subject matter expert on not having that problem, nor does it mean that your viewpoint is the only valid one. I don't have herpes but that doesn't make me an expert on not having it.

Second, I'm completely willing to have a discussion about the pros and cons of either having completely separate finances (i.e. income remains the earner's while both contribute to a common pool that is used for joint expenses) versus everything is jointly held (i.e. both incomes are deposited in the same account, expenses are dealt with from there) and anything in between.

What am seeing here is that we seem to be the last generation of "everything is pooled". The generation behind us are much more likely to keep separate finances in one form or another. Why this would be, I have no idea. Anyone of our generation that wants to keep finances separately are probably on their second (or third, or...) marriage. Out of the people here telling me that separation is hard to understand have been through a divorce AND THEN into a second marriage? I'm sure there are a few, but I also suspect they are in the minority.

For the record I too expected to pool my finances with my wife (whoever she turned out to be) because that's what my parents did (only 1 income, so not much choice) and that was part of being married. It's a fully committed partnership.

The problem, it turns out, is that with some people that's a dangerous situation. I chose at the very last moment to keep my accounts after the wedding because there were some very serious warning signs that I didn't pick up on during the courtship. The truth is that my wife's account is actually a joint account that we opened when we got married in anticipation of pooling resources. It's an account that I have full access to but have never done anything but deposit money into. I have never, not once, withdrawn funds from that account, not even to cover joint expenses.

The warning signs were that I put her name on one of my cc's from before the relationship so she could have access to credit and build a credit rating. She very shortly afterward ran that card into the ground *while* I was actively managing it. So I had to pull her name off again, pay it off and cancel it (I didn't like it anyway). Which is why she went and got herself a CC without my knowledge. She also put my name on it as an authorized user (but not signee).

So the splitting of finances are mostly to protect the family, and even then it's only my finances that are separate, not hers.

While it's true we operate as if our incomes are separate, they are not fully, and while we operate as if the bills are separated, it's simply a matter of "I'll pay these from this account, you pay those from that account". As I said, I PUT money into her (our) account all the time, although at this point I just dump cash into her cc hole as it's the best use of "our" cash. Yes, my accounts are ours as well. There's just a gate keeper and that's me. How that is different from having a joint account that requires approval from both parties is more philosophical than practical.

Not that it matters, but I have a number of peers, in the 10's, that operate on some version of separate but equal finances. Some are unbelievably shitty from my perspective, and some are barely separate at all. I'm not surprised that a number of people here on OO are amazed and confused by the idea of separate finances, but neither is that viewpoint the default best or only approach.

If I dumped all my income into a shared account and still kept track of the bills I keep track of and paid those, the problem that I'm experiencing would still exist. I like the idea that we manage finances as a team, together, but there are some problems with that. For example, I know what I'm doing and she does not. That's an argument for me simply taking over, not for a team effort. I realize that comes across as arrogant but I don't really care. It is what it is. It's true. I would normally view education as the answer to that, but after years of trying, I realize she is impervious to education, at least from me. Or anything that could even be traced back to me, like having her parents speak (education, not criticism) to her on my (our) behalf.

Anyway, kind of all over the place.

a) I fully intended to have joint finances. Then backed out based on evidence.
b) Our finances are joint on her side. On my side, I like to think of it as holding funds in a "trust" that exists for our family's benefit.
c) As many examples of joint finances working, I have examples of separate finances working.
d) Our problems cannot be traced back to separate finances, although I agree that if we went joint and I simply took them over it would fix the money problems. It would probably cause marriage problems though. We have some serious relationship problems that I'm only skimming here. Also, I'm a bad husband.
e) That I can't trust my wife with money is a relationship problem. It's also a financial one. It's also backed by REAMS of evidence.

[GreenGoo]

Again, I said it a page or so ago: I'm really sorry and I hope you both can figure this out, because to me it would be a mortal blow.

I get that. She does not, mostly because evidence suggests that it is not. At this point even I agree that it is not, as I've taken steps to alleviate the problem (after the fact, I fully admit. Or beside the fact? In anticipation of the fact?) so it's only painful and causes stress, rather than breaks the family apart. If we had answered the phone or checked our mail more often, it wouldn't even be a lawsuit. Only a threatened lawsuit. So...yeah.

I've mentioned without details that I can not be on financial management duty full time. I can't even manage my "own" finances full time. Managing the household's 100% of the time is almost certainly beyond my abilities at the moment. When I'm not available she is on her own. Having joint finances will not prevent another lawsuit, because when I'm not looking she will engage in the same behaviour, but with ALL the money, not just some of it.

[GreenGoo]

That being said, I do believe (again IMHO) that these types of problems exist when people believe things are one way ("our finances are separate") but in reality they are another ("you are legally partners"). In other words, the idea of separate finances works great until it doesn't. I honestly cannot say what would happen if I opened the mail today and saw a notice from a bank that my wife had been secretly accruing thousands (or 10s of thousands) worth of debt and I'm being sued. First, where the hell did all the money go? What did those 10s of thousands of dollars buy? The answer to those questions would get to the next element of the decision tree, mainly how is this never happening again?

And when I read things like your response, I'm almost certain there is misunderstanding. I'm not pissed that I'm wrapped up in her shenanigans. I'm not pissed that I somehow got roped up in all this legal business. I'm pissed that my wife can't spend less than she earns, I'm pissed that we ignored the problem until it became the court's problem and I'm pissed that I didn't solve the problem the last 3 times beyond the short term solution of making the debt go away.

There is no confusion over the fact that we are legally the same person under the law, and that separate or joint accounts makes no difference from that perspective. I thought I had made it pretty clear that I understand that right from the start even prior to Rmn9's comments but then you wrote

I do believe (again IMHO) that these types of problems exist when people believe things are one way ("our finances are separate") but in reality they are another ("you are legally partners").

and I'm left scratching my head. Do you think I'm pissed because I think I should not be held accountable for my wife's actions? Is that where there is miscommunication?

Ok, if true that's hilarious. My high school social studies made it pretty clear just how fused at the hip you become when you get married. It's one of the reasons a person can't be compelled to testify against their spouse.

Being married immediately puts in place huge numbers of legal benefits and obligations. It's one of the reasons I support gay marriage and don't think long paper trails of wills and contractual agreements are a satisfactory replacement for marriage.

I'm not pissed because I have to handle my wife's debts. I gladly welcome my ability and legal requirement to help. I just wish she didn't put us in a position where I needed to help in the first place.

For the record, she is the only one named on the lawsuit, but I understand that the court will treat us as being her in this context. I've been operating under that assumption since day one.

Also for the record, the money went to little things that weren't paid for, then compound interest and near usury rates worked their magic. We have nothing to show for it. NOTHING. No new furniture, no new clothes, car, drug habit, nothing. It went to $7-10 a pound chicken breasts that sat in the refrigerator for 2 weeks then got thrown out.

[stessier]

I've mentioned without details that I can not be on financial management duty full time. I can't even manage my "own" finances full time. Managing the household's 100% of the time is almost certainly beyond my abilities at the moment. When I'm not available she is on her own. Having joint finances will not prevent another lawsuit, because when I'm not looking she will engage in the same behaviour, but with ALL the money, not just some of it.

And this is I think where the "good luck" came from. You can't manage the money, she certainly can't - so there is no solution. This will happen again, but at least you know what to expect.

[GreenGoo]

I've mentioned without details that I can not be on financial management duty full time. I can't even manage my "own" finances full time. Managing the household's 100% of the time is almost certainly beyond my abilities at the moment. When I'm not available she is on her own. Having joint finances will not prevent another lawsuit, because when I'm not looking she will engage in the same behaviour, but with ALL the money, not just some of it.

And this is I think where the "good luck" came from. You can't manage the money, she certainly can't - so there is no solution. This will happen again, but at least you know what to expect.

No offense Stessier, but that's bullshit. It's very clear that Rmn9 took his ball and went home because I didn't like what he said, not because there's no solution. The quoted text didn't exist until after he bailed, for example. I mean, you're literally saying that the "good luck" was due to words I wrote after the "good luck" occurred.

I am following along. I'm hanging on every word in this thread. I don't expect others to do the same, it is my life and not theirs obviously. But there is no way "Good luck" wasn't Rmn9 doing what I've witnessed Rmn9 do umpteen times to others. Lay down the gospel, get indignant when it's not viewed as sacrosanct, then leave in a "there's no helping these philistines" tone.

If you believe Rmn9 was simply deciding that based on the circumstances he could offer no more help and sincerely wishing good luck, I've got a bridge and a long posting history to sell you, stessier.

If *you* think the situation is hopeless and have nothing to offer, so be it. Don't try to convince me that's all Rmn9 was doing.

Puh-lease.

In any case, arguing over whether Rmn9 was a dick or not is not productive to anyone. He himself admits to being a dick on many occasions and in similar situations I have witnessed it. Whether he was a dick this time or just deciding to peacefully withdraw with well wishes is irrelevant to anything but my feels, so this the last time I'll address it.

[stessier]

I've mentioned without details that I can not be on financial management duty full time. I can't even manage my "own" finances full time. Managing the household's 100% of the time is almost certainly beyond my abilities at the moment. When I'm not available she is on her own. Having joint finances will not prevent another lawsuit, because when I'm not looking she will engage in the same behaviour, but with ALL the money, not just some of it.

And this is I think where the "good luck" came from. You can't manage the money, she certainly can't - so there is no solution. This will happen again, but at least you know what to expect.

No offense Stessier, but that's bullshit. It's very clear that Rmn9 took his ball and went home because I didn't like what he said, not because there's no solution.

I am following along. I'm hanging on every word in this thread. I don't expect others to do the same, it is my life and not theirs obviously. But there is no way "Good luck" wasn't Rmn9 doing what I've witnessed Rmn9 do umpteen times to others. Lay down the gospel, get indignant when it's not viewed as sacrosanct, then leave in a "there's no helping these philistines" tone.

If you believe Rmn9 was simply deciding that based on the circumstances he could offer no more help and sincerely wishing good luck, I've got a bridge and a long posting history to sell you, stessier.

If *you* think the situation is hopeless and have nothing to offer, so be it. Don't try to convince me that's all Rmn9 was doing.

Puh-lease.

I don't know about laying down the gospel, but I read it as him saying "this is what will work." You posted that there was no way that would work and that post wasn't a "let's discuss this further" it was a "you don't know what you are talking about." So he wished you luck and left. I'm not sure why you want him to engage further - none of his advice is going to work in this situation.

I do see the situation as hopeless - or at least bound to repeat. The only thing you haven't mentioned trying is counseling, but I'm sure you've already considered it (or maybe I missed it - I did skim a bit in parts). Either you need to heal whatevers wrong so you can take over, or you have to get her counseling so that she can. I guess the third option is to hang on until the kids can take over, but that doesn't seem particularly practical.

[RunningMn9]

To be clear, I didn't take my ball and go home. This isn't a policy discussion thread. My only purpose in this thread was to offer GG advice based on what he was telling us. I'm not in the habit of arguing when offering advice. I don't particularly care if GG agrees with it or follows it or ignores it. It might help someone else quietly following along that has fallen into the same situation that GG finds him.

What I won't do is force that advice on anyone. I'm not going to argue about something when the only purpose of being here is to help you. You don't think what I am saying is helpful. That's good enough for me.

[GreenGoo]

I don't know about laying down the gospel, but I read it as him saying "this is what will work." You posted that there was no way that would work and that post wasn't a "let's discuss this further" it was a "you don't know what you are talking about." So he wished you luck and left. I'm not sure why you want him to engage further - none of his advice is going to work in this situation.

But...that's not what happened. At all.

HE said that separate financial responsibilities were a fiction in the context of paying bills. I said that's not true, although I was much more verbose and annoyed about it.

PLENTY of his advice is applicable and will work, and up until the "fiction" comment I happily read his input and assimilated it. The one bone of contention was the word "fiction" with regard to separation of financial responsibilities, which in the context being discussed, is demonstrably ludicrous.

Good lord. I realize I'm being combative but wtf? Are we reading the same thread?

Just to be clear, I refute that I took issue with any "this will work" suggestions from Rmn9 and also refute that I at any point said that there is no way his advice would work.

I categorically deny that happened. Please prove me wrong. Just point me at the statements and I'll do the leg work. You don't have to do anything but give me the post #. Anything at all. Please. I feel like I'm losing my mind here.

I feel like I've been told that water being wet is a fiction and when I pushed back, people are telling me I'm just not open to good advice and it's not worth the time trying to help me.

[RunningMn9]

"this is what will work."

It was a combination of what "this is what might work" and "this is why that might not be working".

[GreenGoo]

To be clear, I didn't take my ball and go home. This isn't a policy discussion thread. My only purpose in this thread was to offer GG advice based on what he was telling us. I'm not in the habit of arguing when offering advice. I don't particularly care if GG agrees with it or follows it or ignores it. It might help someone else quietly following along that has fallen into the same situation that GG finds him.

What I won't do is force that advice on anyone. I'm not going to argue about something when the only purpose of being here is to help you. You don't think what I am saying is helpful. That's good enough for me.

tl;dr
The short version is that the point of contention wasn't advice, it was a statement of fact. I didn't agree with it. That's it. You then threw up your hands and walked away. Lame.

----------------------------

I didn't think ONE THING you said was helpful, and slightly insulting. If I overreacted and was defensive, that's one thing. I resent being classified as doubling down on bad behaviour, not listening, ignoring good advice and generally deciding that changing nothing is the right approach. That's NOT true, that's not what I've been saying and as I said, I resent people saying it.

Out of all the advice, comments and suggestions, I pushed back on one thing. One thing. Suddenly I'm hopeless and can't be helped?

Rmn9, advice is what it is. If you believe your advice is good advice, and I'm not so sure (the point of contention WASN'T EVEN ADVICE, it was just a statement that I disagreed with), it is helpful to the person receiving the advice to have that advice explained. Discussing possible courses of actions, why they might be beneficial, why some people (including the person receiving the advice) thinks it might not be, and rolling it around to look at it from all sides is not an attack on the person giving the advice or even on the advice itself.

You're welcome to drop by, give your advice and leave. If there is push back on your advice, you're welcome to explain why it's good advice or not and leave. I don't see why advice has to be accepted or thrown away, with no discussion. That's not really advice. That's telling someone to do something.

If people think their ideas are good they should be able to do at least a minimum of supporting "why" those ideas are good in a topic of discussion. I think carrots are the devil but if I get push back on it I'm not throwing up my hands and leaving because it's advice and people can take it to heart or not. That's dumb.

[GreenGoo]

"this is what will work."

It was a combination of what "this is what might work" and "this is why that might not be working".

Come on man, my life is hanging here and we're arguing details that are right in front of us. Here's what was said. In the scheme of a help thread, it's barely a blip.

I hoard money AFTER the bills that are solely (as agreed) my responsibility are paid.

The important point I want to make to couples in your situation is that you are living a fiction. There aren’t expenses that she’s responsible for and expenses you are responsible for. You are married and you have a family. There are only expenses that you both are responsible for, whether you guys want to admit it or not.

The context being discussed was dividing the bills and each person paying the ones in their pile. I'm like "living a fiction? Wtf? Hundreds of thousands of people operate under this exact premise with nary a hiccup".

If you meant, as Smoove implies, that we're both responsible for any debts that are accrued because we are married, well duh, but that's not the context of what was being discussed. As I said, that we are both responsible for each others debts/obligations is self evidently true. That doesn't mean that splitting the bills is a fiction.

I've ever misunderstood what you meant because you meant it outside of bill paying, in which case my answer is "duh" or less rudely "of course". That's an integral legal part of being married.

Or you misunderstood me when I said "these bills are my responsibility and those are her responsibility" to mean that I can't be held accountable for debts she's accrued.

Which is it? Did I misunderstand or did you? I'm willing to listen to a third option if you've got one.

[RunningMn9]

HE said that separate financial responsibilities were a fiction in the context of paying bills.

What I said was:

The important point I want to make to couples in your situation is that you are living a fiction. There aren’t expenses that she’s responsible for and expenses you are responsible for. You are married and you have a family. There are only expenses that you both are responsible for, whether you guys want to admit it or not.

You interpreted that how you did. Which is your right. I don't think that anyone else interpreted what I said to mean that you should hold hands and click on the mouse button together to pay the water bill. When I say that you (and all others that arrange marital finances the way that you have) are living a fiction, it's because you are living a fiction. You are focusing on the responsibility for the act of paying a bill. I'm talking about the actual responsibility of the bill being paid. My wife and I share responsibility for every penny that goes out the door. She hasn't looked at the finances in over 10 years since I took command. Her responsibility manifests in knowing that "Hey, there's this giant expense coming up that will impact spending for a few weeks, so be aware and dial back the day-to-day spending until we get clear of it", not in staring at me while I enter the electric bill.

You can assign the water bill to your wife, and the electric bill to yourself, but neither the water company nor the electric company gives a fuck about whatever system you've arbitrarily put in place when it fails. They water company isn't going to call your house and accept your answer that it's your wife's responsibility so they need to talk to her. They don't care about your system. The "fiction" is that you aren't both legally responsible to pay your shit, no matter how you've divided responsibilities to actually pay things. When your wife drops those responsibilities, they immediately revert to you, and that's why we're here.

So, in a reality where you are both legally responsible as a unit, and where your current system of shared responsibility has once again failed, all I suggested was that maybe it's time to realize that your system isn't working, and that a system that is built on the reality of shared responsibility might have a greater chance of success.

I know a number of married couples that operate the way that you do. Exactly one of them seems to be working flawlessly. And that's because both parties are individually fiscally responsible. I don't understand why they do it, but that's irrelevant. It works for them. But it only works because they are both capable of managing finances independently. It would work equally well for them if they had a joint arrangement, because they are both capable of doing that. In the other cases where there are problems, they are all the result of the same dynamic that is happening here:

A) One or both of them is incapable of managing finances in a fiscally responsible manner.
B) The party/parties that are incapable of handling their shit are equally incapable of being honest about it and giving up control.
C) The party/parties that are incapable of handling their shit are unwilling to shed any light on the problems until they are caught or it reaches critical mass.

You've added another element to the problem:
D) The party that is capable of managing their financial responsibilities doesn't want to take control from the party that isn't.

So, there is always a crisis on the horizon, and the magnitude of the crisis is always as big as it can be because it has been simmering and getting worse for months/years while the incapable party mismanaged the situation into oblivion or began to engage in outright deception to cover up the problem.

Split finances CAN work for some couples. They will never work for you and your wife. You will always end up back here.

There, I pushed back. Happy?

[GreenGoo]

There, I pushed back. Happy?

I haven't read it yet, but yes, very.

edit: Also, thank you.

[GreenGoo]

Before I get into it I just want to point out that basic financial management and responsibility is not rocket science and not an insurmountable task for even the least educated/most ignorant. That there is a plethora of evidence that vast swaths of people are incapable of it is not evidence that it is.

The fact that not everyone can do basic fiscal management of their funds is evidence of a major flaw in education and outlook, not a human frailty. I don't accept the premise that a significant portion of people need guardianship over their own finances. Operating with the realities that it is true does not make it acceptable.

How do these people not go bankrupt before marrying a more capable partner? How do they even EXIST in a capitalist society?

[GreenGoo]

My point is that while I accept that some people need guardianship, I refuse to operate with a basic assumption that a vast number of people do, just as I refuse to operate under the basic assumption that without religion people are immoral, or without cheerleaders football sucks.

[Smoove_B]

Sorry, I was wrapped up there for a few hours trying to figure out what can change the nature of a man. It's been 18+ years and I'm still not sure, but I'm the closest I've ever been.

Do you think I'm pissed because I think I should not be held accountable for my wife's actions? Is that where there is miscommunication?

Not at all. I think you're pissed because deep down, a part of you suspected this was happening and/or knew it was going to happen again and sure enough, it did. And I also suspect you're now trying to process that and you're angry (and rightfully so). That's where I throw up my hands because I don't know exactly what to offer. This type of situation is something that would likely happen once for me. I cannot comprehend it happening twice. More than twice? Beyond unthinkable. I also cannot comprehend being in a relationship where my partner is secretly spending thousands of dollars. I'm sure there's part of you feeling shame (you shouldn't) and I have no doubt it's difficult to be angry and confrontational with your wife.

As RM9 stated, I've known or know of (though my parents) of couples and/or family members that have experienced significant financial problems. As far as I've been made aware, all of the couples have used some type of black box accounting sorcery to try and keep their finances separate while maintaining a household. When something goes wrong, it's always been because one of the people in the partnership was mishandling or mismanaging monies while the other was plodding along like everything was fine. I fully admit my sample size is small (less than a dozen), and of course there are couples where this type of arrangement works. It's "working" for you in that you're committed to repeatedly fixing this, which is admirable. However, as others have suggested, I'm also going to say that unless the ingredients change, this will likely happen again. Why wouldn't it?

FWIW I think it sucks that you're in this position and I'd be out of my mind trying to rectify it.

[GreenGoo]

Sorry, I was wrapped up there for a few hours trying to figure out what can change the nature of a man. It's been 18+ years and I'm still not sure, but I'm the closest I've ever been.

Heh. I'm taking a break myself. I'll return and address Rmn9's post later tonight probably. This is exhausting for me not in the least because I'm really trying to give the thread as much honesty and sincerity as I can, and when I hear things like Stessier's viewpoint, I'm dismayed beyond words. That's not a criticism of Stessier or anyone who share's his view, it just doesn't match up with my view of reality. If I can't make the two views match, that's a serious problem for me.

Obviously I'd like to return to discussing and solving the original subject eventually, if possible.

I appreciate your sympathy and I'm of two minds as to the actualities. We're being sued. That's a HUGE PROBLEM. I can make it go away in about 5 minutes at the bank. Suddenly it's a SMALL problem. It's both simultaneously so I'm out of my mind and calm, alternating. I realize there are two problems here. One is what caused the other. Solving the "lawsuit" is the easy part (and thank god) even if it's stressful and unhappy making. I haven't even begun to solve the reason for the lawsuit, outside of this thread discussion. It may end my marriage, so on the one hand I'm scared of it, and on the other I want to solve the big/little problem before taking on the 800lb gorilla in the room. If I take on too much I'm likely to shut down and I can't let that happen until the lawsuit is taken care of.

I completely get that you guys don't split things and the people that do are messed up mostly. I'm a little confused that you don't have equal portions of messed up single finance people and not messed up split finance people because that's what I see in my neck of the woods. There are pros and cons to both approaches and what works for any particular set of people may vary. I get that many people feel that joint finances is inherently the correct answer, but the thousands and thousands of people who get split finances to work without issue show that it isn't so. Your anecdotal evidence says one thing. Mine says another thing. I believe without a lot of evidence that is not anecdotal, that we are the last of the joint account generation. People appear to be moving away from the idea that all the money is everybody's money, and I think that comes from a more equal balance in household incomes. Sure there were lots of dual income households in the 70's and 80's, but the income was not as evenly distributed as it is now. My household is almost exactly a 50/50 split, which is kind of amazing since we are in two completely different fields.

[GreenGoo]

Do you think I'm pissed because I think I should not be held accountable for my wife's actions? Is that where there is miscommunication?

Not at all. I think you're pissed because deep down, a part of you suspected this was happening and/or knew it was going to happen again and sure enough, it did. And I also suspect you're now trying to process that and you're angry (and rightfully so)

I knew it was likely to happen given precedent and because I was managing it part time when I could. This didn't happen in a vacuum. I spent a lot of time and effort (not the most efficient ways possible, but still) "checking in on" her situation. Eventually, as things remained under control, instead of demanding to see CC bills, I simply asked and accepted her answers. When things were starting to creep up we talked about it and she always had an excuse, a reason, a plan how things were gonna get better. I'd throw thousands into it in the hopes of taking some of the pressure off and giving her some breathing space, hoping it would help make her plans actually successful. I also took her at her word. Because the moment I feel like I can't believe my wife, I'm divorcing my wife. Sure it's clear that I can't believe my wife, but I'm not divorcing my wife, so obviously my wife can be believed. How's that for dissonance? And since I'm partly responsible for not taking guardianship of my wife's finances, I'm to blame as well. So when she makes excuses, rationalizes or just generally yells at me for bringing it up, I give in. So I don't have to divorce my wife because I'm to blame as well and she's an honest person so...keep on keeping on.

I can chalk it up to complacency, laziness, a blind eye, a desire to believe my wife is truthful and making progress, or whatever. Obviously I wasn't looking in every month and even I'm not sure how long it had been since I last took a serious look at the situation, or how it got as bad as it has as quickly as it has. I don't have an answer for that and that's on me.

We also have a small fortune in money waiting for us if we simply plow through the paperwork. My wife thinks this is the cause of and the solution for her problems. It should be obvious to anyone following along that that's hilarious. The problem isn't a lack of money. I'm not going into all the details but for example we haven't filed our taxes in a number of years. I realize that sounds insane (and it is) but both our jobs withhold more than we owe every year, so we have substantial refunds coming to us. The government gets their tax money up front and we get our refunds when we get off our asses. They are in no rush to give us our money back so we never hear from them despite not filing. That's just one source of magic money waiting for us.

Feel free to go nuts on how stupid it is that we have not filed. Financially, it basically meaningless. In some ways I'm happy to let the government hold our money so she can't spend it AND THEN get us into the same debt situation. Lack of money is NOT the problem, so adding more money doesn't solve it.

[Blackhawk]

The thing that really stands out to me is that having separated incomes/expenses would make it much harder to grasp the Big Picture. In my experience, figuring out the Big Picture is a fundamental first step in solving financial issues. If things are getting out of whack here, the first thing I do is break down my expenses. "In the last 30 days, I spent X on rent and utilities, X on non-vital services, X on food, X on gas, X on the kids school expenses, X on saving for anticipated expenses, and X on fun." Then I can really see where the money is going, where the leaks are, and where I need to cut back. It allowed me, for instance, to quickly see where I could cut the difference out of my budget when my rent jumped ~30% earlier this year, or to recognize that this month's money bump was because I ordered several things I needed without balancing the books in between, resulting in my spending more than I thought I had.

With split finances, I think it would be much, much more difficult to really grasp what's really going on with money and expenses at the whole household level, or to find and address the leaks before they become floods.

[GreenGoo]

The thing that really stands out to me is that having separated incomes/expenses would make it much harder to grasp the Big Picture. In my experience, figuring out the Big Picture is a fundamental first step in solving financial issues. If things are getting out of whack here, the first thing I do is break down my expenses. "In the last 30 days, I spent X on rent and utilities, X on non-vital services, X on food, X on gas, X on the kids school expenses, X on saving for anticipated expenses, and X on fun." Then I can really see where the money is going, where the leaks are, and where I need to cut back. It allowed me, for instance, to quickly see where I could cut the difference out of my budget when my rent jumped ~30% earlier this year, or to recognize that this month's money bump was because I ordered several things I needed without balancing the books in between, resulting in my spending more than I thought I had.

With split finances, I think it would be much, much more difficult to really grasp what's really going on with money and expenses at the whole household level, or to find and address the leaks before they become floods.

I get that Blackhawk but think about this. We don't manage our finances like you do (and many, many others) because we don't have to. If I want to go out to dinner I just go out to dinner. I don't need to find the money or figure out how to reconjigger the monthly budget because I make way more than I spend and my bank account is...full? Significant?

I'm not trying to rub your face in it, I'm pointing out how foreign our situations are from each other. As this thread illustrates, plenty of people make as much as or more than I do and still manage it exactly like you do, and that's cool. That's responsible. I understand it and both approve and envy it. I don't need to because I'm not in danger of losing the house. This HUGE BIG financial crisis my family is going through? Like I said I can make it go away with 5 minutes at the bank. That doesn't mean it's not a HUGE BIG financial crisis, but what it does mean is that it has almost no impact on my day to day quality of life unless I don't spend those 5 minutes at the bank. It probably has some impact on my retirement quality of life but hopefully I'll just die before that happens but even if I don't, it's not likely to have a HUGE BIG impact on that quality of life even in retirement. It impacts my stress levels, obviously.

Another aspect that I think is important is that I take care of the big picture all by myself, although others are going to suggest because of my wife's debt load I'm not actually taking care of the big picture, which I think is a fair criticism.

Mortgage (as a cost of living and investment)? Check. Independent retirement savings? Check. Pension contributions? Check. Kids education savings? Check. Carrying enough cash in the bank for emergency expenditures (like a leaking roof)? Check. Good credit rating so I can borrow if needed? Check. Zero balance line of credit already pre-approved in case emergencies are larger than bank account? Check.

It's not perfect by any stretch but even with this emergency we are better off than 90% of other Canadian households. We might not have a healthy relationship with money or each other, but we're not going to lose the house and it is unlikely (as much as I yell at my wife that it might be) that I will be living in a cardboard box on the street when I retire. We have it enviably good, from the day to day aspect and the long term aspect.

My wife wants to go to NYC to see a concert? Done. In cash. I want a boat that goes vvvvrrroom vrrroom? Well I just don't want to want that boat, that's all.

I'm in IT. My wife has a thousand dollar tablet with 300 dollar keyboard and a thousand dollar phone because I love her and I want her to have the best. I have a $300 dollar android (a good one, at the time!) that was out of date 2 years ago. The ONLY part of that that makes me bitter is that she also has 10's of thousands of dollars of consumer debt for no good reason that I can figure out, except that adding and subtracting are beyond her abilities without me watching her every move, every day, for the rest of my life. Which is exhausting.

We don't live extravagantly, and that might be the only thing that has saved us so far.

[GreenGoo]

I'd just like to point out that as much as my post seems to be an arrogant assessment of my finances, it would immediately come tumbling down if one of us lost our income for whatever reason.

[killbot737]

Lots of penis fencing going on here. Might be time to step away and take care of things in the real world.
Maybe you're all amazing people who feel nothing and react logically to all situations, but I'm not. Despite my username.
Drazz and his cat drama enraged me so much I did that for a few weeks.

[Smoove_B]

Lots of penis fencing going on here. Might be time to step away and take care of things in the real world.

Don't discount how important penis fencing is. Now that we've transferred some chemicals, the real changes can begin.

[GreenGoo]

Lots of penis fencing going on here. Might be time to step away and take care of things in the real world.
Maybe you're all amazing people who feel nothing and react logically to all situations, but I'm not. Despite my username.
Drazz and his cat drama enraged me so much I did that for a few weeks.

Clearly I am stressing significantly as my compulsiveness and verbosity illustrates.

With that said, I'm going to step away (been trying for about and hour now. Staying has not been completely this thread's fault however) and try to get something done in the yard with my son so we can both feel like we accomplished "something" today in a few minutes. There is nothing realistically that I can do about my situation otherwise, being that it's Saturday evening.

I am not an amazing person, but despite my sometimes (often?) acerbic posting personality here, I am a good person. Also, I don't find anyone posting with regard to my situation to be a not good person, nor do I find the things that have been posted, "bad". Some of it made me grumpy, and some of it was perplexing, but none of it was what I would consider "bad".

I'm sorry that Drazz's thread caused you so much upset. Sometimes I avoid topics that similar reasons. I can't help Draz and I know there are some good hearts trying to help him, so I just stay away for my own reasons. The ability to view other peoples' lives with clinical detachment can be beneficial to finding useful perspectives or identifying faults that the target is blind to. That's why in part I decided to share. With that said, that same clinical detachment can be somewhat unfeeling and unsympathetic. I get that.

For the record I did not post here just to hear how awesome I am and how much my wife sucks. That should be clear but I'll state it for the record. In fact I would find that response offputting and dishonest. Luckily no one seems shy about finding fault with myself, so from that perspective I don't have to worry.

[GreenGoo]

Rmn9 I haven't forgotten you. You were kind enough to respond so I will return the favour, later.