Relatives who just don't get it

[Malcat]

I was not aware of that. They do salt the roads here, although I have not had a problem yet. How often would you suggest to wash it? And would it suffice to hose it down?

I believe modern road salting agents are a bit less corrosive than the actual salt used in the past (and certainly less hostile to roadside vegetation, for better or for worse).  However, the areas of concern are the underside, and a hose probably won't do a good job of getting the salt out of the various places it's been splashed under the car.

Car washes with a good undercarriage wash exist for a reason, and really do make a difference in areas with a lot of road salt.

I think it depends on where you are. Here the ground is saturated in car eating salt. It chews through bikes and winter boots as well.

[ysette9]

Or you could just not wash it.... like my embarrassing car.

My car is seven and a half years old. I have not washed it once.

I assume that your area doesn't salt the roads? In the US, the Rust Belt came by its name honestly - salting the roads in winter results in salt on the vehicle, which results in rust over time. Not washing your car, at least to get the salt off, is a really bad idea.

Oh heavens, no. I don’t live where that white stuff falls from the sky. :)

In subject, I got out the vacuum and sucked up the worst of the crumbs and dirt in the car this afternoon. It is significantly less embarrassing than before. I’d need to shampoo the back seat to undo all the mess from my kids if I really wanted it clean. One day...

[Sibley]

Or you could just not wash it.... like my embarrassing car.

My car is seven and a half years old. I have not washed it once.

I assume that your area doesn't salt the roads? In the US, the Rust Belt came by its name honestly - salting the roads in winter results in salt on the vehicle, which results in rust over time. Not washing your car, at least to get the salt off, is a really bad idea.

I was not aware of that. They do salt the roads here, although I have not had a problem yet. How often would you suggest to wash it? And would it suffice to hose it down?

Go through a car wash that has an undercarriage wash. In the spring after all the snow has melted (and the salt/equivalents) are washed away. That will get you the most benefit with least effort. If there's a lot of salt used, maybe take advantage of a warm spell during the winter to do the same. A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

Rusting out the undercarriage doesn't happen overnight, it takes years, but it will sneak up on you distressingly quickly. And you can't prevent it entirely, but washing it off will greatly slow it down.

[IsThisAGoodUsername]

A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

I'd love to get a good undercarriage wash.

[SwordGuy]

A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

I'd love to get a good undercarriage wash.

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

[IsThisAGoodUsername]

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

THAT is a brilliant idea! How do we make it happen!?!

[Cadman]

Actually, what's being put down on the roads now by the DOT is actually MORE corrosive than the old rock salt, but it is more effective at lower temps. I live in the rust belt and if it's a car I actually care about, a weekly undercarriage wash would be about the right cadence. I've seen first hand what a single season of winter driving can do to the virgin frame of a southern car, and it's not pretty.

Frame aside, it's the brake and fuel lines that really take a beating. An easy fix if you're handy; a good excuse to sell an otherwise decent car if you're clueless.

[SwordGuy]

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

THAT is a brilliant idea! How do we make it happen!?!

Not a clue.   But the old style yard sprinklers, the kind that are on sort of an a-frame and the top pipe has a curve in it that rotates the water spray from side to-side, if tied to a stick, might be a cheap way to wash out the undercarriage.

[Syonyk]

Not a clue.   But the old style yard sprinklers, the kind that are on sort of an a-frame and the top pipe has a curve in it that rotates the water spray from side to-side, if tied to a stick, might be a cheap way to wash out the undercarriage.

FFS.  Spend the $5 in the spring, after you fill up, or the $10 if you have an electric, and get a proper car wash.  The pressure they use is far higher than your garden hose will generate.

There's a difference between being frugal and being cheap, and refusing to use a good car wash a couple times a year on what is probably a several thousand dollar asset or more, is dumb.

[Cadman]

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

THAT is a brilliant idea! How do we make it happen!?!

Not a clue.   But the old style yard sprinklers, the kind that are on sort of an a-frame and the top pipe has a curve in it that rotates the water spray from side to-side, if tied to a stick, might be a cheap way to wash out the undercarriage.

Boom! https://www.toolbarn.com/be-pressure-85-400-062.html

[SwordGuy]

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

THAT is a brilliant idea! How do we make it happen!?!

Not a clue.   But the old style yard sprinklers, the kind that are on sort of an a-frame and the top pipe has a curve in it that rotates the water spray from side to-side, if tied to a stick, might be a cheap way to wash out the undercarriage.

Boom! https://www.toolbarn.com/be-pressure-85-400-062.html

Looks like a plausible and cheap solution if you've already got a pressure washer or intend to get one anyway.

[Sibley]

Actually, what's being put down on the roads now by the DOT is actually MORE corrosive than the old rock salt, but it is more effective at lower temps. I live in the rust belt and if it's a car I actually care about, a weekly undercarriage wash would be about the right cadence. I've seen first hand what a single season of winter driving can do to the virgin frame of a southern car, and it's not pretty.

Frame aside, it's the brake and fuel lines that really take a beating. An easy fix if you're handy; a good excuse to sell an otherwise decent car if you're clueless.

Well, that's yucky. And unfortunately, if it's below freezing, you can't do much about it. Icing up the underneath of a car can't be good for it, at least on a regular basis.

[Malcat]

Actually, what's being put down on the roads now by the DOT is actually MORE corrosive than the old rock salt, but it is more effective at lower temps. I live in the rust belt and if it's a car I actually care about, a weekly undercarriage wash would be about the right cadence. I've seen first hand what a single season of winter driving can do to the virgin frame of a southern car, and it's not pretty.

Frame aside, it's the brake and fuel lines that really take a beating. An easy fix if you're handy; a good excuse to sell an otherwise decent car if you're clueless.

Well, that's yucky. And unfortunately, if it's below freezing, you can't do much about it. Icing up the underneath of a car can't be good for it, at least on a regular basis.

It doesn't ice up the bottom of the car though. Cars are hot while they're on, so the water doesn't get a chance to freeze in place any more than normal road water.

But yeah, I reserve car washes for warmer winter days, like -5C, otherwise the doors can freeze shut.

[Plina]

Actually, what's being put down on the roads now by the DOT is actually MORE corrosive than the old rock salt, but it is more effective at lower temps. I live in the rust belt and if it's a car I actually care about, a weekly undercarriage wash would be about the right cadence. I've seen first hand what a single season of winter driving can do to the virgin frame of a southern car, and it's not pretty.

Frame aside, it's the brake and fuel lines that really take a beating. An easy fix if you're handy; a good excuse to sell an otherwise decent car if you're clueless.

Well, that's yucky. And unfortunately, if it's below freezing, you can't do much about it. Icing up the underneath of a car can't be good for it, at least on a regular basis.

It doesn't ice up the bottom of the car though. Cars are hot while they're on, so the water doesn't get a chance to freeze in place any more than normal road water.

But yeah, I reserve car washes for warmer winter days, like -5C, otherwise the doors can freeze shut.

Not that I washed my car when it was really cold when I had one but would not the dryer in the car wash prevent the Doors from freezing shut?

[Malcat]

Actually, what's being put down on the roads now by the DOT is actually MORE corrosive than the old rock salt, but it is more effective at lower temps. I live in the rust belt and if it's a car I actually care about, a weekly undercarriage wash would be about the right cadence. I've seen first hand what a single season of winter driving can do to the virgin frame of a southern car, and it's not pretty.

Frame aside, it's the brake and fuel lines that really take a beating. An easy fix if you're handy; a good excuse to sell an otherwise decent car if you're clueless.

Well, that's yucky. And unfortunately, if it's below freezing, you can't do much about it. Icing up the underneath of a car can't be good for it, at least on a regular basis.

It doesn't ice up the bottom of the car though. Cars are hot while they're on, so the water doesn't get a chance to freeze in place any more than normal road water.

But yeah, I reserve car washes for warmer winter days, like -5C, otherwise the doors can freeze shut.

Not that I washed my car when it was really cold when I had one but would not the dryer in the car wash prevent the Doors from freezing shut?

I don't know about the dryers where you are, but my car is always still covered in a ton of droplets when I get out of the car wash. Also, it gets extremely cold where I live, like Alaska cold, and it doesn't take a ton of water to freeze a door or lock.

[Kris]

A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

I'd love to get a good undercarriage wash.

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

What we yanks need is a bidet for humans.

[Malcat]

A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

I'd love to get a good undercarriage wash.

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

What we yanks need is a bidet for humans.

So...a bidet??

[martyconlonontherun]

To those who rationalize the "split expenses with separate incomes" strategy - why don't you view yourselves as a household that makes joint decisions, and then you each get a set amount of spending money to do whatever with?  If the higher earner's job requires living in a HCOLA, then that severely disadvantages the lower earner (this exact situation happened with a friend of mine).  Partner1 is an aerospace engineer, and lives in and around major cities, because that's where big airports are.  Partner2 had online work that could be done anywhere, but had no bump for living in a HCOLA.  Keeping their incomes separate was deeply unfair, in my opinion, to Parter2.  Another friend couple has PartnerA in the military, so while they get pay bumps/decreases based on where they live, PartnerB has to reapply for jobs in the new area, and has has more and less success depending on where they live.  Again, another situation where splitting expenses evenly is unfair to the second partner.

Finally, relationships and marriage are mini socialism.  You take care of each other.  What would you do, income and budget-wise, if one person is out of work for 6 months? A year?  Got Covid and is in the hospital for a month?  The split arrangement doesn't accommodate those much.

So because it can't work for some people, no one should take that strategy? I work more and have a less fulfilling job. I'm not holding her back and fully supportive of what she does. In our situation, we live way below our means so we don't have any big desires. We split our mortgage and child costs (which are more clear cut now since it daycare and diapers). It saves from a thousand little grievances on things she buys and things I buy which are totally different.

As for non-financial household contributions, she probably does more around the house daily but I take care of all the yard work and have fixed up two rooms in the last year so I'm guessing total time spent is 50/50. She takes care of the kid more often, but I drive to pick him up/drop him off for 5 hours a weeks.

Also you are assuming these are hard rules. They are not. We have an emergency fund so we could roll with that if either of us loss our job. I had a 8% cut due to furloughs and I ate it, but I'm sure if something really bad happened we would be a "joint-household". It is just a mind-set that this is your money to spend how you feel best and this is the money I spend. We don't have a pre-nup so legally she has half of everything.

It also helps we don't spend a ton of non-required money. We travel but mostly on points I'm in charge of so it doesn't really matter so no fighting about splitting a vacation one person is more excited about. I naturally don't like to eat out, so luckily I win that argument now due to COVID.

[MayDay]

Regarding the car washes.... I am curious what age the cars were for those who have experienced dire circumstances. Because coating technology has improved significantly. The entire undercarriage of your reasonably newish car (let's say 2000 and newer, I can't remember exactly when the technology emerged) has been coated with an e-coat which gets into every nook and cranny of anything metal. Floorboards rusting out are no longer a thing. Of you have a rust problem it is now 99% likely either a manufacturing defect that no amount of washing will overcome, or damage to the coating, which no amount of washing will overcome.

Also: higher salt concentrations actually inhibit corrosion.

^^This is my area of technical expertise, an I overrule the various anecdotes that people share about their car washing routines. Additionally I counter them with my 18 year old civic that was rarely washed and I ly had corrosion at the spots my bike rack rubbed the paint off, and our 17 year old van that only has corrosion where the previous owner crunched it up a bit.

Of course I still washed my car last week because it had so much salt on it that visibility out the windows was becoming a problem.

[Morning Glory]

My car is 17 years old but low mileage. The frame is getting rusty and my husband says he has to be careful where he puts the jack when switching tires. It has rust on the doors too. We live in a place where they use a ton of salt, and it maybe gets washed 2x/ year. I park on the street when I work so there's no sense in having anything too nice. I plan to keep that car for as long as the heat and AC work, or until the frame rusts through, whichever comes first.

Out old pickup has holes in the bed and floorboards from rust.

[Model96]

Regarding the car washes.... I am curious what age the cars were for those who have experienced dire circumstances. Because coating technology has improved significantly. The entire undercarriage of your reasonably newish car (let's say 2000 and newer, I can't remember exactly when the technology emerged) has been coated with an e-coat which gets into every nook and cranny of anything metal. Floorboards rusting out are no longer a thing. Of you have a rust problem it is now 99% likely either a manufacturing defect that no amount of washing will overcome, or damage to the coating, which no amount of washing will overcome.

Also: higher salt concentrations actually inhibit corrosion.

^^This is my area of technical expertise, an I overrule the various anecdotes that people share about their car washing routines. Additionally I counter them with my 18 year old civic that was rarely washed and I ly had corrosion at the spots my bike rack rubbed the paint off, and our 17 year old van that only has corrosion where the previous owner crunched it up a bit.

Of course I still washed my car last week because it had so much salt on it that visibility out the windows was becoming a problem.

Some Japanes and European vehicles have had galvanised panels since the mid eighties, slows the formation of rust for many years.
Worst period for rusting cars was the late 60's to late 70’s, lead coatings were banned but no decent alternatives available..

[Segare]

Haha, yes. Much better to spend hundreds of dollars per month for years than to spend $600 once every several years (like my husband just did to replace all the tires on his 20-year-old car).

When your definition of "finances" is "monthly cashflow based," then, quite literally, yes.

A set of tires for a newer car is typically closer to $1000 - depending on wheel size and such, it can be higher.  Of course, that's an unplanned emergency expense, because who knew tires wear out?  If you're spending, say, $500/mo on your car, and have no savings and no slack room in your budget, then rolling it into a new car at $500/mo, with a loan term of "Well, who cares, nobody ever pays off a car anyway..." with the residual loan balance means that you've "saved money" by keeping your monthly payment the same!  That you have a 150 month loan, well... I mean, that's way down the road, so who cares?

It makes sense, from a particular (and depressingly common) point of view about finances.

Must depend on the vehicle. Our Kia Souls and old VW's are $360 to $420 for a set of four times balanced and installed at the local small tire shop near us.   Six tires for my RV was a bit over $1100, those are load range E tires.

[Morning Glory]

Haha, yes. Much better to spend hundreds of dollars per month for years than to spend $600 once every several years (like my husband just did to replace all the tires on his 20-year-old car).

When your definition of "finances" is "monthly cashflow based," then, quite literally, yes.

A set of tires for a newer car is typically closer to $1000 - depending on wheel size and such, it can be higher.  Of course, that's an unplanned emergency expense, because who knew tires wear out?  If you're spending, say, $500/mo on your car, and have no savings and no slack room in your budget, then rolling it into a new car at $500/mo, with a loan term of "Well, who cares, nobody ever pays off a car anyway..." with the residual loan balance means that you've "saved money" by keeping your monthly payment the same!  That you have a 150 month loan, well... I mean, that's way down the road, so who cares?

It makes sense, from a particular (and depressingly common) point of view about finances.

Must depend on the vehicle. Our Kia Souls and old VW's are $360 to $420 for a set of four times balanced and installed at the local small tire shop near us.   Six tires for my RV was a bit over $1100, those are load range E tires.

My car came with 17" rims and stupid low profile tires. We got a set of 16" rims at the junkyard so I could use real winter tires. The car is a lot safer to drive with those on, and the tires are cheaper and last longer too.

 We buy most of our tires at the junkyard. We have a device for putting tires on and off rims, then we take them to Costco to get balanced.

[NumberJohnny5]

I remember car washes being a thing after they salted the roads. This was back in the 80s and 90s mostly, though I kept it up in the 00s too. Once they put salt down, you knew it'd get all over your vehicle. Once the roads cleared and there was no snow in the forecast, you at least ran it through the car wash. Getting the underside washed was a must; if using an automatic car wash you drove pretty slow when driving up to it (the underside was sprayed before you got the the stop point).

I remember my dad having to use a license plate to patch a hole in the floorboard. Rust was a definite issue. That said, we did have an old Ford that was rusted really bad, but the rust was stronger than non-rusted metal on newer cars.

Doesn't seem to be as much an issue regarding the structural parts of vehicles, but I have seen newer vehicles (newer to me is 2000+) have various bits that are exposed show lots of corrosion. Stuff like fuel and brake lines. Sometimes wiring too.

[Just Joe]

Not that I washed my car when it was really cold when I had one but would not the dryer in the car wash prevent the Doors from freezing shut?

You can get silicone grease to spread on the door seals so the doors won't freeze shut. Honda sells their version at the dealer parts counter.

www.amazon.com/Genuine-Honda-08798-9013-Silicone-Grease/dp/B00GD49GTS

Edited to add - most auto parts stores have something similar as do places online for less money.

[Lomonossov]

Why so many smart, educated people choose to arrange nothing at all even though there are so many options? I don't know. I think maybe some people don't want to think of bad things that can happen, or maybe because so many people are unmarried these days, they think of marriage or the legal alternatives as a religious ritual and not as something that has serious legal consequences.

I think openly talking about those topics is taboo for a significant amount of people. I'm getting married this year (if COVID allows) and openly talked with my wife-to-be about having separate finances. My parents divorced twice (married - divorced - remarried - divorced again) and I went through that whole process for around 20 years in total, until the youngest sibling was 25 or so. I do love my partner very much, but I would rather have a clear agreement of what would happen in case of divorce if it ever happens instead of having to make big decisions when we do not love each other anymore, have been betrayed or jealous and lawyers are all over the place.

Her family did not understand at all that we were even having the conversation. Where we do live the default marriage is one pot and you have to do a pre-nup to keep your finances split. When she talked with her family about it, they looked at my like I was some sort of greedy vampire, and they kept asking "why" even if some of them are divorced themselves or have very close members of the family that went through it. I guess lots of people do not want to consider that something bad can happen, same goes with inheritance.

We have been living together for quite some time now and we have an arrangement that works for us: we split common expenses according to our income, and personal expenses go separately. We do not spend much anyway and we both save a reasonable part of each paycheck, but I do personally prefer to have control of my finances, let her have the control over hers and each of us be responsible for our own decisions. When kids come, I guess I'll have to chip in more, but that's OK.

I do respect the "one pot" philosophy, but it's not for me. Maybe because I've seen it failing in practice, and what the aftermath may be (my dad still has EUR 70k in debt, and they divorced in the late 90s).

Regardless of what the agreement is it should be more common to openly talk about those topics within the couple, I think. Otherwise is easy to take things for granted that would eventually lead to misunderstandings with awful consequences (financial, personal and otherwise). I've made those mistakes with my siblings, I don't want to repeat them with my partner.

[La Bibliotecaria Feroz]

A married couple should enjoy comparable standards of living regardless of who makes more money. Other than that, you do you.

My husband and I are both divorced. We don't have a prenup. My thinking is, either you married an asshole or you didn't. If you married an asshole, a prenup won't save you, and if you didn't, you don't really need one, but YMMV. The process of talking through what would happen may be just as valuable as the legal agreement. In our case, we were able to see how the other person had handled their divorce and that we are fair people. We have an approximate idea of how much we each came into the marriage with and a handshake agreement that if it goes south, we leave with that plus half of what we made together.

(In fact, I think my husband was maybe a bit more generous to his ex than was strictly necessary, but better that than the reverse.)

[pachnik]

A married couple should enjoy comparable standards of living regardless of who makes more money. Other than that, you do you.

My husband and I are both divorced. We don't have a prenup. My thinking is, either you married an asshole or you didn't. If you married an asshole, a prenup won't save you, and if you didn't, you don't really need one, but YMMV. The process of talking through what would happen may be just as valuable as the legal agreement. In our case, we were able to see how the other person had handled their divorce and that we are fair people. We have an approximate idea of how much we each came into the marriage with and a handshake agreement that if it goes south, we leave with that plus half of what we made together.

(In fact, I think my husband was maybe a bit more generous to his ex than was strictly necessary, but better that than the reverse.)

I agree with a married couple having a similar standard of living.  Frankly, I can't imagine otherwise. 

Regarding marriage contracts, I do have one with my current common law spouse.  We got it when we first moving in together about 8 or so years ago; in all, we've been together close to 15 years.  Looking back at it now, I don't think I needed a marriage contract.  I watched how my husband handled dealing with his previous wife and he was very fair and reasonable.   

The marriage contract was more about my past - being in an earlier relationship with a very controlling spouse.  And I didn't take care of my legal rights at the time. 

[Imma]

A married couple should enjoy comparable standards of living regardless of who makes more money. Other than that, you do you.

My husband and I are both divorced. We don't have a prenup. My thinking is, either you married an asshole or you didn't. If you married an asshole, a prenup won't save you, and if you didn't, you don't really need one, but YMMV. The process of talking through what would happen may be just as valuable as the legal agreement. In our case, we were able to see how the other person had handled their divorce and that we are fair people. We have an approximate idea of how much we each came into the marriage with and a handshake agreement that if it goes south, we leave with that plus half of what we made together.

(In fact, I think my husband was maybe a bit more generous to his ex than was strictly necessary, but better that than the reverse.)

It's true that you either married an asshole or you didn't. But a lot of people don't find that out until they've been together for years. Some people say 'I knew in my gut it wasn't right' but some people genuinly have no idea. Like, I literally know two people who didn't find out until after several years of marriage that their husband was a pedophile. It happens.

I absolutely don't expect my s/o to actually be an asshole, but I would never trust someone enough to say that without a doubt. Both my and my partner are children from baaaad marriages/divorces, so I experienced the same as you @Lomonossov and @pachnik . I think growing up like that makes it hard to ever fully trust anyone. My parents divorce wasn't as bad as the marriage was because the kids were already adults, they didn't have any money but they also didn't have any debt. But my mother was a victim of financial abuse. My father would just raid the bank account as soon as the money came in and spent it all on himself and his toys until his balance was 0. My mother worked very hard and earned her own money, but it all went into this big black hole.  My mum was the queen of frugal, she made more money almost their whole marriage and she had nothing to show for it when she got out.

My teenage and young adult years were full of worries.  I struggled with serious illness, low income, I literally worried my father may one day kill my mother (that was a serious threat at that point, and I'm convinced he would have if he hadn't fallen in love with another woman right during the worst part of their divorce) and I literally had no one to help me out except for one family member who was only able to give me moral support, and she has passed since.  I was always frugal, always a saver, and still I was stressed every month because I had to find money to pay the bills.

Having the legal documents that we have, is a form of damage control. If my s/o ends up being an asshole after all, that will be terrible, but at least I'm for example not liable for any debts I didn't co-sign for which I otherwise would have been. So I can at least get out with my own income, my retirement accounts, my emergency fund in my name only. I can start over. And I know that with the material things taken care of, I am mentally strong enough to handle the rest.

[SwordGuy]

People can go crazy.   My wife and I saw it happen with one couple.   Made the sane person's life hell until they were able to divorce several years later.

[Sayyadina]

I watched my Mum divorce my stepdad while in a magic period of about a year. And she's vindictive at the best of times. It wasn't pretty.

Just because you have your mental health now doesn't mean you will when things are going badly and the same for your partner. If I had seen that before getting married I would have probably gotten a prenup. I love my husband and I don't want to put him through anywhere near what Mum did to my stepdad.

[Mighty Eyebrows]

If you married an asshole, a prenup won't save you, and if you didn't, you don't really need one, but YMMV.

That is like saying "If you are in a car accident, a seat belt won't save you." It won't make it perfect, but it is much better than the alternative.

[shelivesthedream]

A married couple should enjoy comparable standards of living regardless of who makes more money. Other than that, you do you.

This is what troubles me so much about separate finances. There are so many scenarios in which one half of the couple might be earning vastly more or less than the other that I find it hard to imagine that it can be more than a small minority for which it really works. One does better at work than the other, one takes time off to raise children, one gets ill and can't work for a bit...

I think the problem on agreeing on a standard of living is there with both joint and separate finances. If one wants to live in a fancier house than the other, you don't solve that just by throwing all your money in together. But my earnings right now and for the foreseeable are £0 cuz maternity leave and pandemic. Then we'll move a lot for my husband's career. At some point, surely squaring up separate finances in that scenario does end up as being equivalent to joint finances because he'll spend so much time "subbing" me.

[Lomonossov]

This is what troubles me so much about separate finances. There are so many scenarios in which one half of the couple might be earning vastly more or less than the other that I find it hard to imagine that it can be more than a small minority for which it really works. One does better at work than the other, one takes time off to raise children, one gets ill and can't work for a bit...

I think the problem on agreeing on a standard of living is there with both joint and separate finances. If one wants to live in a fancier house than the other, you don't solve that just by throwing all your money in together. But my earnings right now and for the foreseeable are £0 cuz maternity leave and pandemic. Then we'll move a lot for my husband's career. At some point, surely squaring up separate finances in that scenario does end up as being equivalent to joint finances because he'll spend so much time "subbing" me.

In our case separate finance is an insurance in case of divorce only.

I am making way more than my partner and I'm happy to contribute more as well so we can have a better living and she doesn't have her paycheck depleted each month. We split all the common expenses 70/30 (roughly representing the differences in income).

It's true that is a imperfect solution in a few ways:

- I own the house and pay for the mortgage all by myself, but it is unclear how much she should contribute - if at all - to some expenses (renovations, appliances, etc.). This is causing some friction every now and then.
- When the kids come, and despite the relatively generous maternity leave we have in this country, her income will be cut in half for a year per kid. We don't have this completely figured out yet.
- Once time passes some additional big expenses may come our way - new car, second house in my country - and we don't have a plan to deal with them

On the other hand I've seen what a nasty divorce can do to a household economy. None of my parents recovered after using money as a weapon in the divorce process - raiding accounts, spending like crazy, going in debt while they were still married -. In fact, finances kept them constantly in touch for a very long time after they were divorced in an endless battle about one small property that is still not fully resolved 20 years after.

I guess there are no perfect solutions. I'm happy to contribute more to give my partner some room to build a retirement fund for her and to pay for most of the expenses (since I'm bringing most of the income). We get along very well in terms of standard of living. If we live happily ever after, separate finances won't make any difference in the end. If the marriage goes south at least we have a clear idea of what to expect. I hope we can cross those bridges when we get to those rivers without killing each other.

[Imma]

A married couple should enjoy comparable standards of living regardless of who makes more money. Other than that, you do you.

This is what troubles me so much about separate finances. There are so many scenarios in which one half of the couple might be earning vastly more or less than the other that I find it hard to imagine that it can be more than a small minority for which it really works. One does better at work than the other, one takes time off to raise children, one gets ill and can't work for a bit...

I think the problem on agreeing on a standard of living is there with both joint and separate finances. If one wants to live in a fancier house than the other, you don't solve that just by throwing all your money in together. But my earnings right now and for the foreseeable are £0 cuz maternity leave and pandemic. Then we'll move a lot for my husband's career. At some point, surely squaring up separate finances in that scenario does end up as being equivalent to joint finances because he'll spend so much time "subbing" me.

I think very few people with seperate finances completely seperate all spending. Most have joint accounts for day to day spending. I can't imagine me eating a steak for dinner while Mr Imma eats rice and beans.

I'm not saying separate finances are Ideal for everyone. In your situation, where you choose to spend a lot of time with your children while your husband is in Ghostbuster training and will be travelling from haunted house to haunted house, it would be complicated.

But a lot of people that choose to have seperate finances actively try to avoid that type of "traditional" life. They don't want the household finances to become dependent on one person. They want to avoid creating a situation where one person depends on the other.

Now, I know that you are religious so you probably have different values surrounding marriage than I do. But for us, one half of the couple staying home to care for a family or one half sacrificing their career for the other's career is simply not an option. Mr Imma's work requires him to be away from home quite a lot but it doesn't affect me, I don't have to travel with him. That would not be an option for me.

We don't have children so that's not an issue for us. But we both work 4 days a week and had always planned to continue that if we'd had children. It was very enriching for me to have a working mother (I think you had a different experience) so that's something we would have wanted to give our children too. Maternity leave is paid in my country and if I become disabled or unemployed I'd qualify for benefits based on my work history. So the only way we'd end up in a 1-income situation is if we'd voluntarily quit our job.

When we got to know each other, he earned a lot more than I did, now I make much more than he does. Our joint income is waaaayy more than we need, we could both live of the lowest income indefinitely. This deal didn't feel unfair to me when I was the lowest earner (I came up with it) and it doesn't suddenly feel unfair now I have more money. I don't feel guilty about it either. I choose to put more effort into my career while he prefers a more laid-back job. That's a choice and choices have consequences.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

I think growing up like that makes it hard to ever fully trust anyone.

The other down-side is that it makes it hard to ever fully trust oneself to be able to recognize red flags for what they are, in a timely fashion. Growing up with different kinds of fighting, abuse, or financial nonsense happening between one's parents normalizes that kind of behavior to the point where it seems right and appropriate. So the mental circuitry that kicks in early during the courtship process for most people-- "nope, that's a deal-breaker, move on before getting attached" doesn't engage because it literally doesn't exist. It hasn't been built, because the young person never gets a good feel for what "objectively normal and healthy" looks like.

It's not too different from people who grow up with emotionally unavailable or absentee parents, who subsequently get caught in a friend-zone relationship or as a married person's side piece... or who grow up in a family with addiction or untreated mental illness and later end up choosing a partner with the same traits as the person who caused all the chaos growing up. We all tend to want partners who are high-status or at least worthy of respect, and the highest-status person in any given family is the axis around whom the family revolves: the one whose feelings and opinions are the most important and the one everyone wants to please or is afraid to disappoint. If we come from families where the axis of revolution is due to addiction, absenteeism, irresponsibility or tantrum artistry, then that's the behavior we associate with a person of high worth. At the life stage where we think "I could have a partner of my own", we look for something we recognize as appropriate. We might know, intellectually, that an unstable or predatory partner is not a good choice, and that emotionally we're less guarded, but that only serves to make us mistrust our own feelings of attraction when they occur.

[CodingHare]

I think very few people with seperate finances completely seperate all spending. Most have joint accounts for day to day spending. I can't imagine me eating a steak for dinner while Mr Imma eats rice and beans.

I'm not saying separate finances are Ideal for everyone. In your situation, where you choose to spend a lot of time with your children while your husband is in Ghostbuster training and will be travelling from haunted house to haunted house.

But a lot of people that choose to have seperate finances actively try to avoid that type of "traditional" life. They don't want the household finances to become dependent on one person. They want to avoid creating a situation where one person depends on the other.
....

I think I'm in a very similar boat, @Imma .  I was raised by two parents who had been together 35+ year now?  But they were both previously cheated on by their SOs and divorced.  My mom made damn sure I knew how to keep myself financially secure and not reliant on a partner.

I make a bit less than my SO.  We pay for shared expenses out of a joint account.  We both max out our 401k and ROTHS.  I save a little extra because I want to retire earlier than my husband.

The structure of the accounts is really irrelevant, it's the communication and trust (but verify) that matters to us.  This arrangement lets us save for our goals, not judge each other on discretionary spending, and if shit ever hit the fan, separate finances relatively cleanly.

[Zikoris]

But a lot of people that choose to have seperate finances actively try to avoid that type of "traditional" life. They don't want the household finances to become dependent on one person. They want to avoid creating a situation where one person depends on the other.

I think this is key. For me, the very idea of being financially dependent on a guy (or anyone, for that matter) is so repulsive I would never, ever want to do it under any circumstances. I'm also an assertive enough person that I would never accept a standard of living that was above what I could comfortably afford while still being to put money into the things I like (retirement, hobbies, etc). So for people like, me, a lot of the presented scenarios here would just never happen, regardless of joint-vs-separate finances.

[Imma]

I think growing up like that makes it hard to ever fully trust anyone.

The other down-side is that it makes it hard to ever fully trust oneself to be able to recognize red flags for what they are, in a timely fashion. Growing up with different kinds of fighting, abuse, or financial nonsense happening between one's parents normalizes that kind of behavior to the point where it seems right and appropriate. So the mental circuitry that kicks in early during the courtship process for most people-- "nope, that's a deal-breaker, move on before getting attached" doesn't engage because it literally doesn't exist. It hasn't been built, because the young person never gets a good feel for what "objectively normal and healthy" looks like.

It's not too different from people who grow up with emotionally unavailable or absentee parents, who subsequently get caught in a friend-zone relationship or as a married person's side piece... or who grow up in a family with addiction or untreated mental illness and later end up choosing a partner with the same traits as the person who caused all the chaos growing up. We all tend to want partners who are high-status or at least worthy of respect, and the highest-status person in any given family is the axis around whom the family revolves: the one whose feelings and opinions are the most important and the one everyone wants to please or is afraid to disappoint. If we come from families where the axis of revolution is due to addiction, absenteeism, irresponsibility or tantrum artistry, then that's the behavior we associate with a person of high worth. At the life stage where we think "I could have a partner of my own", we look for something we recognize as appropriate. We might know, intellectually, that an unstable or predatory partner is not a good choice, and that emotionally we're less guarded, but that only serves to make us mistrust our own feelings of attraction when they occur.

That's very true. I decided as a young adult I wouldn't want to end up like my mother - the situation I grew up in was abusive and toxic in general, the marriage was worse than the divorce. I avoided getting into a serious relationship until I grew up a bit, had lived on my own for a while, I read a lot of books and had some therapy. Mr Imma had a similar background and went through roughly the same development. We got together when we were 23 and 26 and had both worked and lived on our own for quite a while.

But I have seen several friends fall into this trap. One friend is in a second marriage and is still repeating childhood patterns. It's hard to witness sometimes.

[Kris]

A hose will help, but not as much as an undercarriage wash.

I'd love to get a good undercarriage wash.

What you yankees need is a bidet for cars.

What we yanks need is a bidet for humans.

So...a bidet??

Yes. That was my point.

[Sugaree]

Apparently my brother and his wife are moving back in with my parents in order to pay off some debt.  I'll admit to being curious as to how they were holding everything together, but I didn't think it was this bad.  My suspicion is that his new promotion is not being held up because they can't find someone to replace him at his old position, but that there is an issue with his credit.  Hopefully, this will be the kick in the ass they need to get it together. 

[Cassie]

When I married for the third time I owned a condo and we used the equity to buy a house because we were taking custody of his son and the condo was too small. I got a prenup to protect my 60k. He let his first wife take advantage. We are now divorcing because he was unfaithful for the second time. He didn’t want to give me the first 60 off the top until I reminded him about the prenup.  Because we totally agreed we saved money by hiring a paralegal and it was final 3 days after filing.  Don’t trust anyone is my motto. We lived together 6 years before marriage and I thought I really knew him. My second husband hid most of our money and I was screwed after 22 years. Fool me once:)).

[Roadrunner53]

When I married for the third time I owned a condo and we used the equity to buy a house because we were taking custody of his son and the condo was too small. I got a prenup to protect my 60k. He let his first wife take advantage. We are now divorcing because he was unfaithful for the second time. He didn’t want to give me the first 60 off the top until I reminded him about the prenup.  Because we totally agreed we saved money by hiring a paralegal and it was final 3 days after filing.  Don’t trust anyone is my motto. We lived together 6 years before marriage and I thought I really knew him. My second husband hid most of our money and I was screwed after 22 years. Fool me once:)).

Cassie, your post makes me sad. Sorry you have had 3 bad relationships but glad you had the prenup and got your money back. Wish you all the best in whatever your future holds.

I have a friend who has also been married 3 times and it wiped her out financially too. First marriage one child and husband with drinking issues and anger problems when drunk involving violence. The next two marriages involved children from both and kids that were unruly and not disaplined. Total disrespect. I do believe the children were the main source of the break ups. She thought her kid walked on water and the husbands didn't see anything wrong with their kids attitudes. What a mess. No thanks to that chaos.

[pachnik]

When I married for the third time I owned a condo and we used the equity to buy a house because we were taking custody of his son and the condo was too small. I got a prenup to protect my 60k. He let his first wife take advantage. We are now divorcing because he was unfaithful for the second time. He didn’t want to give me the first 60 off the top until I reminded him about the prenup.  Because we totally agreed we saved money by hiring a paralegal and it was final 3 days after filing.  Don’t trust anyone is my motto. We lived together 6 years before marriage and I thought I really knew him. My second husband hid most of our money and I was screwed after 22 years. Fool me once:)).

Cassie, I am sorry to hear this too.  Good that you took care of your legal rights at the time of getting together. 

[Adventine]

@Cassie , I'm sorry it turned out that way but good for you for having the foresight to get a prenup.

[SwordGuy]

@Cassie , I'm sorry it turned out that way but good for you for having the foresight to get a prenup.

Absolutely!   And, @Cassie, I don't know you so I can't give tailored advice, I can only give generalized advice.

I say this in the most loving way possible, please take a long, hard look at your shopping list.

It's possible you were just unlucky.   It's also possible that your shopping list has things on it that lead you to people who cause problems for their mates.   I've certainly known other folks with that problem.

Best of luck in the future.   Love.

[Dicey]

@Cassie , I'm sorry it turned out that way but good for you for having the foresight to get a prenup.

+1. My brother is losing the battle with wife #3. He's a good dude, but clearly has processing issues. When he's in the throes of new love, something short circuits in his brain. Breaks my heart. So yeah, I'm feeling the feels for you.

[LaineyAZ]

Cassie,
I think we're both in the 55+ age range, and I'm also divorced, so here's some unsolicited advice if you're open to it:  consider getting a place in a 55+ community.  There's plenty of built-in companionship opportunities, and most of those places have some sort of association and clubhouse with plenty of activities.
Almost like being back on a college campus except it's for seniors. 

I know you'll need time to grieve the loss of this relationship but just know that there are lots of us internet strangers who have been through this and similar things, and we'd all like to see you enjoy your life.  Best to you.

[Cassie]

Sword guy, at 66 I will not be marrying or cohabitating again. I am in the process of buying a condo for myself. Since both my second and third marriages lasted over 20 years not complete failures. People change over time. My third marriage was super happy until the last 10 years.  It was a downhill progression of him hoarding, lying, being so lazy he did nothing all traits he didn’t have previously. I posted on a retirement forum and the stories people tell how their spouses changed in old age are astounding. I would have stayed if it wasn’t for the cheating.  Mostly it’s women reporting how grumpy their husbands have gotten.

Lainey, I have a big friend group and the 55 communities are much too expensive where I live. Actually I am not sad at all and looking forward to living by myself with my 2 little doggies. I will no longer be anyone’s maid. The divorce was final last week in only 3 days and relief is the only thing I feel. At one point I was more in love with him than I have been with anyone but the 10 years of stress slowly killed it.  I think he was confident that I wouldn’t leave him. He’s not happy that it’s over.

[calimom]

So sorry to hear this @Cassie but sounds like you have a good handle on the current reality and are moving forward. Best of luck to you in your rebuilding.