What would you do if your SO won't "let" you ER?

[swampwiz]

I suppose that for most everyone, ER is not even a thought unless the SO is thinking along the same lines.  And speaking from the male POV, if there are kids that are in school, the threat of the wife divorcing would destroy any hope of ER until the cash sink known as "kids" is completed - so ER would need to wait until that threat has been neutralized.

BTW, I'm a childless bachelor, so this is academic for me.

[2Birds1Stone]

Interesting topic to me, as I am in a committed relationship with someone who is very less driven to FIRE and if I want to FIRE together most of the burden to accumulate is on me.

From reading many of the journals here, there are quite a few ERed folks with a working spouse. That's likely what will end happening for me.

[swampwiz]

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/us/he-s-retired-she-s-working-they-re-not-happy.html

The Waskovers, who live in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., came to their own solution. ''It got to the point where I said, 'If you don't go out and get a job, I'm getting a lawyer,' '' Mrs. Waskover said.

[use2betrix]

Find a new spouse? I can barely fathom some of the marital problems many people have on here. Like - did you put any thought into making one of the largest commitments of your life? I was single for several years before meeting my wife. I went on dates weekly if not more, and loved the single life. Then my wife came along and I thought “if I’m going to settle down, this is it.”

Seems a lot of people are unable to be happy unless they’re in a relationship, so they just settle for less than what they’re really after.

[bacchi]

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/us/he-s-retired-she-s-working-they-re-not-happy.html

The Waskovers, who live in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., came to their own solution. ''It got to the point where I said, 'If you don't go out and get a job, I'm getting a lawyer,' '' Mrs. Waskover said.

To be fair, this couple is from an older generation. His identity was too wrapped up in "work" and being the breadwinner,

'He felt threatened because my life was so exciting and his wasn't anymore,'' said Mrs. Waskover, who is now 70 and still working. ''It was constant bickering. When we did go out, he wouldn't dance with me. I guess he was trying to assert himself.''

The couple at the end of the article manages it well enough,

Mr. Schneider said that he was happy to see his wife work, but that he himself did not miss working. ''I never tied my identity to business or teaching,'' he said. ''There's so many other things to do. And when I go to Lincoln Center in the afternoon, in that crowd I feel young.''

What would I do? I saved enough for 2 people. If it came down to my partner demanding that I work, I'd shrug and graciously accept the attorney's letter.

[Cassie]

I don't think it is fair for one partner to demand the other work if they don't need the $.  They each should do what makes them happy.

[Laura33]

IMO if you get to FIRE and haven't already figured out the plan, you're doing it wrong.  Sure, if it's a new relationship, or if one of you just had a big change of heart, it could happen.  But if you're @7-10 years into the relationship, you should be a lot closer than "keep working or get divorced" -- this is part of figuring out if you're compatible in the first place, and learning how to compromise over the years.

I know I have written on this topic so many times that I sound like a broken record, so sorry.  IMO the health of a relationship is defined by how well it meets the needs of both parties.  If you are in a relationship with someone you love and who loves you, you both want each other to be happy as much as you want to be happy yourself.  IME, one person being happy, and the other one sucking it up for 20-30 years, is simply unacceptable.  So if people are at such an impasse that that is the only solution, there is a much deeper fundamental problem. 

I had this exact conversation with DH when he was very unhappy in his job a few years ago.  He of course didn't say anything, because we had just spent several years in a place where I was very unhappy, and we had finally moved back to where both my family and my dream job were located.  So I called him on it.  I told him I knew he was unhappy, and I reminded him that the first thing we said when we decided to get married was that both of us needed to have jobs that we liked, and I was going to hold him to that.  I said that I knew he takes his responsibilities very seriously, and so there was no doubt in my mind that he planned to just suck it up for the next 20 years, because he knew I was happy here.  And I told him that that was not an acceptable outcome to me, so he needed to figure out what would make him happy, and I would support that even if it meant moving again. 

He found a way to make that job work and get happy again.  And now almost 15 years later, it's my turn to compromise again, because he wants to keep working until we can live a life of ridiculous luxury, and I think we have all we need to FIRE.  But you know, I'd still rather have a happy DH than FIRE alone.

So my only advice if you do find yourself in that situation is to keep talking until you figure out the "why" of it all -- why you want to FIRE, and why your SO doesn't want you to -- and then figure out if there is a compromise that will get both of you enough of what you need to be happy.  Simple.  Just not easy.

[SC93]

This is exactly what I always talk about. Are you getting married for LOVE or MONEY? If for love, all you have to do is make the commitment to each other and you can even do it in you choice of a place of worship. Like most who don't understand, if you marry FOR MONEY, you get the government involved with a marriage license you stopped by the court house and PAID for.

I'm still asking for anyone to show me where in the Bible it says to stop by the county court house and pay them in order to be married..... :)

[Padonak]

Don't let anybody tell you what to do with your hard earned money. It's hard enough to earn it. Spending it as you see fit is your prerogative.

[ChpBstrd]

There is a wide variety of "spouse not on board" situations. In order of severity:

1) spouse is a spendthrift, resists basic saving steps like 401k matches, and will destroy any savings the couple accumulates.
2) spouse is willing to save "normal" amounts like 5-10% and get the 401k match, but likes their SUV/truck, fancy house, expensive hobbies, treats, and luxuries.
3) spouse has frugal tendencies, but either loves the idea of working until 70 or thinks FIRE is a pipe dream / is unconvinced by math.
4) spouse is somewhat frugal, but apathetic about active pursuit of FIRE and unwilling to sacrifice anything at all for it.

As weirdos pursuing FIRE, we must acknowledge that we are the ones expecting something abnormal from our spouses. Many of us got married before the idea of FIRE entered our heads, so we are the ones changing the deal in terms of lifestyle expectations. Our spouses might have 99 good qualities and pursuit of FIRE is the one we have to work on. Some sympathy and understanding is due

In the case of situations 1 & 2, the choices are to give up OR negotiate one's own retirement. This is complicated, because these luxury-addicted personalities see money as only having the purpose of being spent and may come to resent any stash that they can't spend because it's "yours". Suggesting separate finances may also cause them to think you are slow-divorcing. Counseling is recommended. Keep in mind that you probably resent your spouse for their spending, so you'll do a crappy job negotiating.

In situations 3 & 4, the choices are:
a) Do passive things like getting their 401k contributions maxed out, automate savings, and cancel a few credit cards. You let them know of course. (Funny story - my apathetic DW was in her work's payroll portal looking up her schedule. I asked if I could see the keyboard and mouse while she took a phone call. I went to the 401k deduction and maxed it out right in front of her. Then I said, "this will improve our financial security during retirement," she looked and nodded - maybe to the person on the phone, IDK. Clicked save. That was $100k in savings ago.)
b) Get them excited about some tangible results, like saving your first $100k or hitting $250k net worth. Make these milestones celebrations with champagne, roses, beer, whatever they like. Apply classical conditioning: milestones mean we do something fun.

[Awesomeness]

This is exactly what I always talk about. Are you getting married for LOVE or MONEY? If for love, all you have to do is make the commitment to each other and you can even do it in you choice of a place of worship. Like most who don't understand, if you marry FOR MONEY, you get the government involved with a marriage license you stopped by the court house and PAID for.

I'm still asking for anyone to show me where in the Bible it says to stop by the county court house and pay them in order to be married..... :)

Are you saying there’s a fundamental difference between a marriage that takes place in a church vs a marriage that takes place at a courthouse??

I was married by a friend whose a judge...am I doomed? Lol

I believe they are saying that you can commit to someone and be married. In a place of worship, if you want or not, you just don’t file the license with the county.  So this is for love.

Or go in front of a judge, file the paperwork and it’s legal. Do this for citizenship or healthcare etc. so this is for money.


I have a lot to lose if I legally remarry. I pay 24$ a month for my healthcare I don’t have a job, this is for the rest of my life, I’d lose that and not get it back if I got remarried. Right now I feel they’ll have to pry my ID card out of my dead cold hands before I give it up. 

But I am only 47 and loved being married. I did a lot of things right and I have no regrets so how do you trust again after what I went through. Especially with the high odds of second and third marriages failing. And I’m financially set for life. I can’t risk it.  I’m perfectly healthy and could live many more years and know I don’t want to be alone. But I am a Christian so.....   I’m for a commitment ceremony.  Divorce sucks. 

[Zikoris]

What would I do? Split, and accept that it would take an extra few years of saving to hit FIRE. As far as I'm concerned, there is no person on planet earth worth ruining my life forever for. It would be no different than a partner deciding they wanted to have kids, or some other (for me, personally) life-ruining thing.

[mm1970]

Find a new spouse? I can barely fathom some of the marital problems many people have on here. Like - did you put any thought into making one of the largest commitments of your life? I was single for several years before meeting my wife. I went on dates weekly if not more, and loved the single life. Then my wife came along and I thought “if I’m going to settle down, this is it.”

Seems a lot of people are unable to be happy unless they’re in a relationship, so they just settle for less than what they’re really after.

I've been (happily) married for 22 years, but people change.  Luckily, we're still compatible.  But I for one have changed a LOT from aged 26 to almost-48.

[Missy B]

There is a wide variety of "spouse not on board" situations. In order of severity:

1) spouse is a spendthrift, resists basic saving steps like 401k matches, and will destroy any savings the couple accumulates.
2) spouse is willing to save "normal" amounts like 5-10% and get the 401k match, but likes their SUV/truck, fancy house, expensive hobbies, treats, and luxuries.
3) spouse has frugal tendencies, but either loves the idea of working until 70 or thinks FIRE is a pipe dream / is unconvinced by math.
4) spouse is somewhat frugal, but apathetic about active pursuit of FIRE and unwilling to sacrifice anything at all for it.

As weirdos pursuing FIRE, we must acknowledge that we are the ones expecting something abnormal from our spouses. Many of us got married before the idea of FIRE entered our heads, so we are the ones changing the deal in terms of lifestyle expectations. Our spouses might have 99 good qualities and pursuit of FIRE is the one we have to work on. Some sympathy and understanding is due

In the case of situations 1 & 2, the choices are to give up OR negotiate one's own retirement. This is complicated, because these luxury-addicted personalities see money as only having the purpose of being spent and may come to resent any stash that they can't spend because it's "yours". Suggesting separate finances may also cause them to think you are slow-divorcing. Counseling is recommended. Keep in mind that you probably resent your spouse for their spending, so you'll do a crappy job negotiating.

In situations 3 & 4, the choices are:
a) Do passive things like getting their 401k contributions maxed out, automate savings, and cancel a few credit cards. You let them know of course. (Funny story - my apathetic DW was in her work's payroll portal looking up her schedule. I asked if I could see the keyboard and mouse while she took a phone call. I went to the 401k deduction and maxed it out right in front of her. Then I said, "this will improve our financial security during retirement," she looked and nodded - maybe to the person on the phone, IDK. Clicked save. That was $100k in savings ago.)
b) Get them excited about some tangible results, like saving your first $100k or hitting $250k net worth. Make these milestones celebrations with champagne, roses, beer, whatever they like. Apply classical conditioning: milestones mean we do something fun.

This. I'd add that if you engage your spouse from the perspective of wanting to understand, that your value your relationship and want to continue and deepen it if you possibly can, you might well resolve your differences, given time.
Everybody has emotional stuff, unresolved stuff, and it might be stuff that affects your relationship with money profoundly. A lot of people have unconscious resistance to having money. When they realize what their judgements are consciously and explore whether those beliefs are really true, it can help a lot. They may have familial-induced psychological 'damage' from being raised in a family with poverty mentality or spendthrift mentality or some variation.
If there's a resistant spouse, I think it can only help to find out exactly what they don't like about early retirement, and what they do. There's probably something that can be worked with. Especially if everything else is good.

[Cpa Cat]

Find a new spouse? I can barely fathom some of the marital problems many people have on here. Like - did you put any thought into making one of the largest commitments of your life?

A lot changes over a lengthy marriage. I'm not the same person I was when I got married 15 years ago. And I'll be even more different after 15 years more.

I suspect that FIRE isn't even on most people's radar when they get married.

This is exactly what I always talk about. Are you getting married for LOVE or MONEY? If for love, all you have to do is make the commitment to each other and you can even do it in you choice of a place of worship. Like most who don't understand, if you marry FOR MONEY, you get the government involved with a marriage license you stopped by the court house and PAID for.

I'm still asking for anyone to show me where in the Bible it says to stop by the county court house and pay them in order to be married..... :)

Nothing warms the heart and soul to Christianity like hearing that my marriage is loveless and invalid if it's not biblically based. You should go out on the street corner and preach with your awesome and inspirational brand of gospel. Who could resist converting?

[ChpBstrd]

This is exactly what I always talk about. Are you getting married for LOVE or MONEY? If for love, all you have to do is make the commitment to each other and you can even do it in you choice of a place of worship. Like most who don't understand, if you marry FOR MONEY, you get the government involved with a marriage license you stopped by the court house and PAID for.

I'm still asking for anyone to show me where in the Bible it says to stop by the county court house and pay them in order to be married..... :)

Are you saying there’s a fundamental difference between a marriage that takes place in a church vs a marriage that takes place at a courthouse??

I was married by a friend whose a judge...am I doomed? Lol

There is a difference.

The religious ceremony grants you permission to have sex with the other person per the religious institution's leader who speaks on behalf of God, for those who feel the need to obtain such permission. The function of the religious ceremony is to delegate who exactly in the organization can have sex with whom so that jealousy and infighting don't break out.

The civil ceremony and paperwork confer a specific set of contractual rights and responsibilities regarding property sharing, inheritance, medical information sharing and decision-making, taxes, child custody, insurance, liability, and lots more.

Arguably the civil marriage is more important because without it you would be in a sexual roommates situation that all your friends sanctioned, but have none of the legal rights or monetary incentives for faithfulness of people who entered the contract.

[bluebelle]

Interesting topic to me, as I am in a committed relationship with someone who is very less driven to FIRE and if I want to FIRE together most of the burden to accumulate is on me.

From reading many of the journals here, there are quite a few ERed folks with a working spouse. That's likely what will end happening for me.

this is similar to me....except he really wants to FIRE, just make any adjustments....and now he's trying to 'add on' to the retirement budget for stuff he wants....sigh

[bluebelle]

Interesting topic to me, as I am in a committed relationship with someone who is very less driven to FIRE and if I want to FIRE together most of the burden to accumulate is on me.

From reading many of the journals here, there are quite a few ERed folks with a working spouse. That's likely what will end happening for me.

this is similar to me....except he really wants to FIRE, just make any adjustments....and now he's trying to 'add on' to the retirement budget for stuff he wants....sigh

and I should add, he is on-board with the delayed gratification (we're targeting 2 years), he's just now trying to add to the retirement spend (I still think we have enough and I know he wildly overestimates what things cost), just frustrated that he's changing the playing field on me

[gerardc]

Let's say you FIREd early at 35 years old by yourself, but then you meet a younger SO who is frugal, pro-FIRE but has pretty low income which makes it difficult for her. Would you look into merging finances, both work longer to achieve FIRE together or would you allow yourself to enjoy FIRE while they earn their own money. Is that fair? considering that you worked more during your younger years while they had the chance to fulfill other needs... In other words, can one person of the relationship FIRE on their own or does that not work for obvious reasons I can't see? Still keeping finances relatively separate.

[Missy B]

You may meet a younger guy who is not interested in kids or McMansions. I dated one for a while, and he would have been totally onboard with your plan and keen to learn what you had to offer on the subject.

[Slow2FIRE]

Let's say you FIREd early at 35 years old by yourself, but then you meet a younger SO who is frugal, pro-FIRE but has pretty low income which makes it difficult for her. Would you look into merging finances, both work longer to achieve FIRE together or would you allow yourself to enjoy FIRE while they earn their own money. Is that fair? considering that you worked more during your younger years while they had the chance to fulfill other needs... In other words, can one person of the relationship FIRE on their own or does that not work for obvious reasons I can't see? Still keeping finances relatively separate.

In this scenario, you decided this is "the right one" for marriage?

What I would do: 
1. setup prenup for separation of pre-marital assets (not sure how well this is obeyed in various states)
2. find some work to help build her nest egg which should get her there very fast (I would never co-mingle my pre marital assets with hers or our post-marital assets to protect the prenup)
3. enjoy FIRE together for the rest of our days

A possible revision of #2 is if kids are in the future picture is that I would gladly be a stay at home dad, take care of domestic duties, and still pay a reasonable portion of joint bills (rent, food, utilities, raising kids) out of my stash while freeing her up to pursue higher paying work.  Even if she stays low paid and has a slow path to FIRE, I'd have near 18 years of being occupied with stay at home dad duties and just by virtue of being married, some of her bills would decrease (utilities, potentially rent).

[gerardc]

So since I wasn't interested in getting married again, or kids (step or my own), or supporting anyone for many extra years, or going back to work I'm still  happily single. I would also maintain separate finances but I'm an old middle aged person who wants to protect my assets so younger people may not care about that.

Say the hypothetical FIREd person in my scenario wanted kids, their potential partner isn't FIREd at all but they also don't want to necessarily support them financially for everything, they're kinda fucked, are they?

We tried to make it work but I'm not the trailing spouse type at all and just couldn't put my life on hold or work an additional 30 years. So parted ways.

If you're FIREd it seems relatively easy to be a trailing spouse. You can still travel from time to time and meet your husband wherever he happens to be located for his work. Depends on your level of independence in a relationship I guess.

In this scenario, you decided this is "the right one" for marriage?

What I would do: 
1. setup prenup for separation of pre-marital assets (not sure how well this is obeyed in various states)
2. find some work to help build her nest egg which should get her there very fast (I would never co-mingle my pre marital assets with hers or our post-marital assets to protect the prenup)
3. enjoy FIRE together for the rest of our days

A possible revision of #2 is if kids are in the future picture is that I would gladly be a stay at home dad, take care of domestic duties, and still pay a reasonable portion of joint bills (rent, food, utilities, raising kids) out of my stash while freeing her up to pursue higher paying work.  Even if she stays low paid and has a slow path to FIRE, I'd have near 18 years of being occupied with stay at home dad duties and just by virtue of being married, some of her bills would decrease (utilities, potentially rent).

I don't think I'd get married for the reasons you mention - too difficult to maintain separate finances. I would do like you suggest, maintain separate finances but be generous in division of costs in a non committal way (e.g. renting, not buying) and maybe household tasks.

[MrThatsDifferent]

There is a wide variety of "spouse not on board" situations. In order of severity:

1) spouse is a spendthrift, resists basic saving steps like 401k matches, and will destroy any savings the couple accumulates.
2) spouse is willing to save "normal" amounts like 5-10% and get the 401k match, but likes their SUV/truck, fancy house, expensive hobbies, treats, and luxuries.
3) spouse has frugal tendencies, but either loves the idea of working until 70 or thinks FIRE is a pipe dream / is unconvinced by math.
4) spouse is somewhat frugal, but apathetic about active pursuit of FIRE and unwilling to sacrifice anything at all for it.

As weirdos pursuing FIRE, we must acknowledge that we are the ones expecting something abnormal from our spouses. Many of us got married before the idea of FIRE entered our heads, so we are the ones changing the deal in terms of lifestyle expectations. Our spouses might have 99 good qualities and pursuit of FIRE is the one we have to work on. Some sympathy and understanding is due

In the case of situations 1 & 2, the choices are to give up OR negotiate one's own retirement. This is complicated, because these luxury-addicted personalities see money as only having the purpose of being spent and may come to resent any stash that they can't spend because it's "yours". Suggesting separate finances may also cause them to think you are slow-divorcing. Counseling is recommended. Keep in mind that you probably resent your spouse for their spending, so you'll do a crappy job negotiating.

In situations 3 & 4, the choices are:
a) Do passive things like getting their 401k contributions maxed out, automate savings, and cancel a few credit cards. You let them know of course. (Funny story - my apathetic DW was in her work's payroll portal looking up her schedule. I asked if I could see the keyboard and mouse while she took a phone call. I went to the 401k deduction and maxed it out right in front of her. Then I said, "this will improve our financial security during retirement," she looked and nodded - maybe to the person on the phone, IDK. Clicked save. That was $100k in savings ago.)
b) Get them excited about some tangible results, like saving your first $100k or hitting $250k net worth. Make these milestones celebrations with champagne, roses, beer, whatever they like. Apply classical conditioning: milestones mean we do something fun.

I’m dealing with #3 and I hate it!

[Villanelle]

I am pretty sure I would work to get at the heart of their objections, and then find a way to address them that involved a little compromise on both our parts.  There is so much middle ground.  I can't really answer any more fully because without knowing their reasoning, I can't say what I'd suggest or how I'd react.

All that said, I left my job to move overseas as a training spouse for what we thought was going to be about 2.5 years and is now going to be at least 9.5, if not more.  The reality is that I am inadvertently be retired  Going back to the US with a 10 year resume gap, in my 40s, I anticipate incredible difficulties finding anything even close to comparable to where I was when I left (never mind the decade of raises and promotions I've missed out on).  Working full time for $40k per year that we don't really need in a job that won't interest or challenge me?  No thanks.  That said, I actually really do miss working.  But I miss a job that was semi-interesting and fulfilling, and I don't know if that's in the cards now.  Anyway, thankfully DH is pretty chill and if I don't want to work, that's fine.  The problem is I also really chafe at being a housewife.  I'm still figuring it all out, but right now I'm leaning toward volunteer work, finishing my masters, and then maybe pursing work in that field, which likely won't be very lucrative but would hopefully be interesting. 

[soccerluvof4]

Marriage is full of compromises so there is enough of that already. Going into a marriage I would make sure you start out with someone that has the same foundation Ideals as you do. I. E. wants kids or not, travel alot, house or not , be spendy pants or not.  Yes its possible some will change but if its an important enough I would make it a prerequisite on the more important things to you.

[Adam Zapple]

So many great responses.  I've only been married for 8 years but I would just do what I always do when I am dead set on something that she is not on board with...just do it and let the chips fall where they may.  While this is generally not good marital advise, it works for us.

I'm not a jerk, just have a wife who is very resistant to change due to anxiety issues.  I'm sure when my/our FIRE date comes along, she will need a lot of convincing.  My plan is to see one or two financial advisers at that time to "prove" to her that we can really stop working.  I don't think she will want to believe me.

[dude]

There is a wide variety of "spouse not on board" situations. In order of severity:

1) spouse is a spendthrift, resists basic saving steps like 401k matches, and will destroy any savings the couple accumulates.
2) spouse is willing to save "normal" amounts like 5-10% and get the 401k match, but likes their SUV/truck, fancy house, expensive hobbies, treats, and luxuries.
3) spouse has frugal tendencies, but either loves the idea of working until 70 or thinks FIRE is a pipe dream / is unconvinced by math.
4) spouse is somewhat frugal, but apathetic about active pursuit of FIRE and unwilling to sacrifice anything at all for it.

As weirdos pursuing FIRE, we must acknowledge that we are the ones expecting something abnormal from our spouses. Many of us got married before the idea of FIRE entered our heads, so we are the ones changing the deal in terms of lifestyle expectations. Our spouses might have 99 good qualities and pursuit of FIRE is the one we have to work on. Some sympathy and understanding is due

In the case of situations 1 & 2, the choices are to give up OR negotiate one's own retirement. This is complicated, because these luxury-addicted personalities see money as only having the purpose of being spent and may come to resent any stash that they can't spend because it's "yours". Suggesting separate finances may also cause them to think you are slow-divorcing. Counseling is recommended. Keep in mind that you probably resent your spouse for their spending, so you'll do a crappy job negotiating.

In situations 3 & 4, the choices are:
a) Do passive things like getting their 401k contributions maxed out, automate savings, and cancel a few credit cards. You let them know of course. (Funny story - my apathetic DW was in her work's payroll portal looking up her schedule. I asked if I could see the keyboard and mouse while she took a phone call. I went to the 401k deduction and maxed it out right in front of her. Then I said, "this will improve our financial security during retirement," she looked and nodded - maybe to the person on the phone, IDK. Clicked save. That was $100k in savings ago.)
b) Get them excited about some tangible results, like saving your first $100k or hitting $250k net worth. Make these milestones celebrations with champagne, roses, beer, whatever they like. Apply classical conditioning: milestones mean we do something fun.

Very wise post. For sure I didn't have the FIRE dream in mind when we married, and when I first started bringing it up, it was not met with acceptance at all. Over time, I've slowly and steadily beat the drum and hammered the message home. Specifically, "honey, I'm 7 years older than you, and I've got a finite window of time to do the very physical things* I love to do and which bring me fulfillment, and I've worked my ass off to give us a good life and put us in the situation where we can both retire early, albeit in staggered fashion. I've got enough between my pension, savings, and future Social Security to (a) replace my share of household income when I retire, (b) and cover your shortfall when you retire (and oh, by the way, I've got enough for us both to retire at the same time if you'd ratchet down your spendy lifestyle)."

This is the gist of the message I've been sending. In addition, I've done the things ChpBstrd mentioned above re: getting her to save more and tracking it and updating her, and celebrating milestones. As she's watched the accounts grow, and at the same time, as she's learned of her friends' dearth of savings or the level of their debt, she's come to appreciate my mindset and is grateful for the abundance we have. Only thing is, now and again, we'll discuss a purchase or the like, and she'll say, "stop being cheap, we have plenty of money!" At which point I have to remind her of why exactly that's the case.

In short, I'll be retiring next year, likely some 5-7 years before she will, and she's okay with it. However, she does (rightfully so given my wanderlust) have concerns about me taking off for weeks at a time while she's going to work every day. I'm working on that.

But to the original post -- I don't like being told what to do, so if it came down to a spouse thinking she could tell me I can't do x or y, well, that shit's not gonna fly, and I'd be hitting the road. I'm in a position now where if I had to give up half my shit, I could still live a nice life on half. That gives me peace of mind.

* rock/ice climbing, backcountry snowboarding, surfing, hiking, camping, etc.

[2Birds1Stone]

Very wise post. For sure I didn't have the FIRE dream in mind when we married, and when I first started bringing it up, it was not met with acceptance at all. Over time, I've slowly and steadily beat the drum and hammered the message home. Specifically, "honey, I'm 7 years older than you, and I've got a finite window of time to do the very physical things* I love to do and which bring me fulfillment, and I've worked my ass off to give us a good life and put us in the situation where we can both retire early, albeit in staggered fashion. I've got enough between my pension, savings, and future Social Security to (a) replace my share of household income when I retire, (b) and cover your shortfall when you retire (and oh, by the way, I've got enough for us both to retire at the same time if you'd ratchet down your spendy lifestyle)."

This is the gist of the message I've been sending. In addition, I've done the things ChpBstrd mentioned above re: getting her to save more and tracking it and updating her, and celebrating milestones. As she's watched the accounts grow, and at the same time, as she's learned of her friends' dearth of savings or the level of their debt, she's come to appreciate my mindset and is grateful for the abundance we have. Only thing is, now and again, we'll discuss a purchase or the like, and she'll say, "stop being cheap, we have plenty of money!" At which point I have to remind her of why exactly that's the case.

In short, I'll be retiring next year, likely some 5-7 years before she will, and she's okay with it. However, she does (rightfully so given my wanderlust) have concerns about me taking off for weeks at a time while she's going to work every day. I'm working on that.

But to the original post -- I don't like being told what to do, so if it came down to a spouse thinking she could tell me I can't do x or y, well, that shit's not gonna fly, and I'd be hitting the road. I'm in a position now where if I had to give up half my shit, I could still live a nice life on half. That gives me peace of mind.

* rock/ice climbing, backcountry snowboarding, surfing, hiking, camping, etc.

Your posts on this topic have always hit me right in the feelz man.

3+ years ago when I first joined this board I knew that my SO would be trailing me, and while I've done my best to lead the horse to water.......it seems like my situation very well may mirror your arrangement with DW.

Age certainly plays into things for us as well. I'm 4 years older and have been busting my ass off with a FIRE goal in mind for nearly 7 years now. I don't know if I could keep working for years longer while my spouse chose to take a path that was identified as having priorities other than a shorter path to FI.

[NoStacheOhio]

BTW, I'm a childless bachelor, so this is academic for me.

I would strongly recommend you make sure your goals and interests are aligned with any serious relationship. You can make anything work as long as you're moving and growing together, in the same direction.

[dude]

Very wise post. For sure I didn't have the FIRE dream in mind when we married, and when I first started bringing it up, it was not met with acceptance at all. Over time, I've slowly and steadily beat the drum and hammered the message home. Specifically, "honey, I'm 7 years older than you, and I've got a finite window of time to do the very physical things* I love to do and which bring me fulfillment, and I've worked my ass off to give us a good life and put us in the situation where we can both retire early, albeit in staggered fashion. I've got enough between my pension, savings, and future Social Security to (a) replace my share of household income when I retire, (b) and cover your shortfall when you retire (and oh, by the way, I've got enough for us both to retire at the same time if you'd ratchet down your spendy lifestyle)."

This is the gist of the message I've been sending. In addition, I've done the things ChpBstrd mentioned above re: getting her to save more and tracking it and updating her, and celebrating milestones. As she's watched the accounts grow, and at the same time, as she's learned of her friends' dearth of savings or the level of their debt, she's come to appreciate my mindset and is grateful for the abundance we have. Only thing is, now and again, we'll discuss a purchase or the like, and she'll say, "stop being cheap, we have plenty of money!" At which point I have to remind her of why exactly that's the case.

In short, I'll be retiring next year, likely some 5-7 years before she will, and she's okay with it. However, she does (rightfully so given my wanderlust) have concerns about me taking off for weeks at a time while she's going to work every day. I'm working on that.

But to the original post -- I don't like being told what to do, so if it came down to a spouse thinking she could tell me I can't do x or y, well, that shit's not gonna fly, and I'd be hitting the road. I'm in a position now where if I had to give up half my shit, I could still live a nice life on half. That gives me peace of mind.

* rock/ice climbing, backcountry snowboarding, surfing, hiking, camping, etc.

Your posts on this topic have always hit me right in the feelz man.

3+ years ago when I first joined this board I knew that my SO would be trailing me, and while I've done my best to lead the horse to water.......it seems like my situation very well may mirror your arrangement with DW.

Age certainly plays into things for us as well. I'm 4 years older and have been busting my ass off with a FIRE goal in mind for nearly 7 years now. I don't know if I could keep working for years longer while my spouse chose to take a path that was identified as having priorities other than a shorter path to FI.

:-)

[wageslave23]

If a spouse threatened to leave me over any type of materialistic reason, I'd make the decision for her.  Bye!  If you are that shallow, that you would leave me over money then you sicken me.  Now if that other person had circumstances beyond their control (medical) which necessitated me working longer then fine.

[wageslave23]

If a spouse threatened to leave me over any type of materialistic reason, I'd make the decision for her.  Bye!  If you are that shallow, that you would leave me over money then you sicken me.  Now if that other person had circumstances beyond their control (medical) which necessitated me working longer then fine.

It’s not always that black and white in actual marriages.
A couple might come together with plans and aspirations and one partner may discover MMM and suddenly say “honey! I’m going to start cutting your hair so I can stop working” and suddenly the partner who is used to a certain standard of living, who signed on for a certain standard of retirement is being asked to give up what they are used to because their spouse read the profanity strewn words of a stranger online.

Few spouses are ridiculous enough to be able to apply black and white thinking to marital problems. Most are cases where each side has some decent reasoning, they’re just not on the same page. Few spouses are going to say “I get a BMW or I’m out”. They do exist, but they’re not as common as say “but we’ve been saving for that BMW for years, it’s not fair for you to unilaterally decide that we’re going to do something different with our money just because you’ve jumped on a ER bandwagon that I haven’t”.
See the difference?

Marriage often means accepting that two people won’t always be equally well served by a single solution to any given problem. It’s just reality.

I get what you're saying.  But as long as neither spouse is outspending their income then it shouldn't be a problem what one spouse chooses.  Of course when finances are mixed things are more complicated.  For me though, working or not working in the op is not the issue.  If someone is materialistic it is not attractive to me.  I dated a girl for quite awhile but things came to head when she said that she broke up with her last bf because he only made 75k and had no aspirations to move up in his company.  I broke up with her soon after even though I make more than that.  To me its just not attractive.  As my long as my SO makes enough money to support themselves, I don't care whether they make 10k or 200k. 

[Spendy Stache]

I know I have written on this topic so many times that I sound like a broken record, so sorry.  IMO the health of a relationship is defined by how well it meets the needs of both parties.

Laura33, your commentary is always spot-on to me! Thank you for being a broken record :)

[e34bb098]

I suppose that for most everyone, ER is not even a thought unless the SO is thinking along the same lines.  And speaking from the male POV, if there are kids that are in school, the threat of the wife divorcing would destroy any hope of ER until the cash sink known as "kids" is completed - so ER would need to wait until that threat has been neutralized.

When I first got bit by the FIRE bug, I went in way too hard and strong and my SO recoiled badly from the thought.

However we have always had mostly-separate finances.  We share a checking, savings, and credit card for household expenses, but other than contributing the agreed-upon amount to our shared accounts, our money is ours to do with what we will.  (Within the confines of not being stupid and running up a personal credit card or something.)

So I managed to get her to the point where she doesn't care where my contribution to the household account is coming from (paycheck, retirement accounts, whatever), as long as it's reliable and consistent.  And as long as I don't retire and then start drinking at noon every day or something.  And she is very into the idea of me retiring early so I can be an involved parent.  I currently go to work early and come home late, which sucks.

I don't bug her about her own finances, but she has started to get more curious, so I think we'll start having more conversations soon.  There's definitely a lot of fat that we can trim from our household budget (mostly groceries and restaurants).  But I have to be careful.  We are already really frugal by "normal" standards in that we both live on about half of our take-home.  I don't want to push too hard and set back the conversation.  I'd rather take it slow and retire in ~7 years, then push too hard in an attempt to retire in ~5, but it causes a breakdown and then I retire in ~10.

Ultimately it comes down to which you value more: your marriage or your financial freedom.  Having money and retiring early, but losing my family is a poor trade for me.  YMMV.

[GuitarStv]

It's a trick question.  Obviously, you made sure that you were on the same page financially before getting too involved with your SO . . .

[wageslave23]

If a spouse threatened to leave me over any type of materialistic reason, I'd make the decision for her.  Bye!  If you are that shallow, that you would leave me over money then you sicken me.  Now if that other person had circumstances beyond their control (medical) which necessitated me working longer then fine.

It’s not always that black and white in actual marriages.
A couple might come together with plans and aspirations and one partner may discover MMM and suddenly say “honey! I’m going to start cutting your hair so I can stop working” and suddenly the partner who is used to a certain standard of living, who signed on for a certain standard of retirement is being asked to give up what they are used to because their spouse read the profanity strewn words of a stranger online.

Few spouses are ridiculous enough to be able to apply black and white thinking to marital problems. Most are cases where each side has some decent reasoning, they’re just not on the same page. Few spouses are going to say “I get a BMW or I’m out”. They do exist, but they’re not as common as say “but we’ve been saving for that BMW for years, it’s not fair for you to unilaterally decide that we’re going to do something different with our money just because you’ve jumped on a ER bandwagon that I haven’t”.
See the difference?

Marriage often means accepting that two people won’t always be equally well served by a single solution to any given problem. It’s just reality.

I get what you're saying.  But as long as neither spouse is outspending their income then it shouldn't be a problem what one spouse chooses.  Of course when finances are mixed things are more complicated.  For me though, working or not working in the op is not the issue.  If someone is materialistic it is not attractive to me.  I dated a girl for quite awhile but things came to head when she said that she broke up with her last bf because he only made 75k and had no aspirations to move up in his company.  I broke up with her soon after even though I make more than that.  To me its just not attractive.  As my long as my SO makes enough money to support themselves, I don't care whether they make 10k or 200k.

Yeah...but you’re not likely to marry that girl if that’s your priority in the first place. Most people don’t suddenly find out that the person they married is way more materialistic than they’re comfortable with.
The OP was talking about marriage and kids, not ruling out marrying someone due to different financial values.

I still think that either way, wanting to divorce someone over finances or job is shallow.  Whether the situation is the one the OP stated or the reverse where both people expected to FIRE and then a spouse decided that they wanted to spend more and so both had to keep working.  If I'm married and committed to a person, I'm going to always be committed to them unless they are no longer committed to me.  Even if that means they ramp up their spending later in life and I have to change my retirement plans because of it.

[gerardc]

Very wise post. For sure I didn't have the FIRE dream in mind when we married, and when I first started bringing it up, it was not met with acceptance at all. Over time, I've slowly and steadily beat the drum and hammered the message home. Specifically, "honey, I'm 7 years older than you, and I've got a finite window of time to do the very physical things* I love to do and which bring me fulfillment, and I've worked my ass off to give us a good life and put us in the situation where we can both retire early, albeit in staggered fashion. I've got enough between my pension, savings, and future Social Security to (a) replace my share of household income when I retire, (b) and cover your shortfall when you retire (and oh, by the way, I've got enough for us both to retire at the same time if you'd ratchet down your spendy lifestyle)."

This is the gist of the message I've been sending. In addition, I've done the things ChpBstrd mentioned above re: getting her to save more and tracking it and updating her, and celebrating milestones. As she's watched the accounts grow, and at the same time, as she's learned of her friends' dearth of savings or the level of their debt, she's come to appreciate my mindset and is grateful for the abundance we have. Only thing is, now and again, we'll discuss a purchase or the like, and she'll say, "stop being cheap, we have plenty of money!" At which point I have to remind her of why exactly that's the case.

In short, I'll be retiring next year, likely some 5-7 years before she will, and she's okay with it. However, she does (rightfully so given my wanderlust) have concerns about me taking off for weeks at a time while she's going to work every day. I'm working on that.

But to the original post -- I don't like being told what to do, so if it came down to a spouse thinking she could tell me I can't do x or y, well, that shit's not gonna fly, and I'd be hitting the road. I'm in a position now where if I had to give up half my shit, I could still live a nice life on half. That gives me peace of mind.

* rock/ice climbing, backcountry snowboarding, surfing, hiking, camping, etc.

I like that -- you contribute your share to the joint account then if you can do that with your investments it doesn't matter, and of course you help more if you can.

Although I don't see the point of marrying. Why would you voluntarily give up half your assets to your ex? If you have significantly more money that's just retarded. You're gifting a ton of money to someone you'll potentially hate at that point. I found there are 2 kinds of women: those who insist on marrying eventually, and those who don't care as long as you're together, they might or might not. I don't trust the former type at all. I can't possibly feel love for them, ever. There's always this gut feeling that something is not right.

[MayDay]

Very wise post. For sure I didn't have the FIRE dream in mind when we married, and when I first started bringing it up, it was not met with acceptance at all. Over time, I've slowly and steadily beat the drum and hammered the message home. Specifically, "honey, I'm 7 years older than you, and I've got a finite window of time to do the very physical things* I love to do and which bring me fulfillment, and I've worked my ass off to give us a good life and put us in the situation where we can both retire early, albeit in staggered fashion. I've got enough between my pension, savings, and future Social Security to (a) replace my share of household income when I retire, (b) and cover your shortfall when you retire (and oh, by the way, I've got enough for us both to retire at the same time if you'd ratchet down your spendy lifestyle)."

This is the gist of the message I've been sending. In addition, I've done the things ChpBstrd mentioned above re: getting her to save more and tracking it and updating her, and celebrating milestones. As she's watched the accounts grow, and at the same time, as she's learned of her friends' dearth of savings or the level of their debt, she's come to appreciate my mindset and is grateful for the abundance we have. Only thing is, now and again, we'll discuss a purchase or the like, and she'll say, "stop being cheap, we have plenty of money!" At which point I have to remind her of why exactly that's the case.

In short, I'll be retiring next year, likely some 5-7 years before she will, and she's okay with it. However, she does (rightfully so given my wanderlust) have concerns about me taking off for weeks at a time while she's going to work every day. I'm working on that.

But to the original post -- I don't like being told what to do, so if it came down to a spouse thinking she could tell me I can't do x or y, well, that shit's not gonna fly, and I'd be hitting the road. I'm in a position now where if I had to give up half my shit, I could still live a nice life on half. That gives me peace of mind.

* rock/ice climbing, backcountry snowboarding, surfing, hiking, camping, etc.

I like that -- you contribute your share to the joint account then if you can do that with your investments it doesn't matter, and of course you help more if you can.

Although I don't see the point of marrying. Why would you voluntarily give up half your assets to your ex? If you have significantly more money that's just retarded. You're gifting a ton of money to someone you'll potentially hate at that point. I found there are 2 kinds of women: those who insist on marrying eventually, and those who don't care as long as you're together, they might or might not. I don't trust the former type at all. I can't possibly feel love for them, ever. There's always this gut feeling that something is not right.

What's retarded is using the word retarded.

Check yourself.

[dude]

I like that -- you contribute your share to the joint account then if you can do that with your investments it doesn't matter, and of course you help more if you can.

Although I don't see the point of marrying. Why would you voluntarily give up half your assets to your ex? If you have significantly more money that's just retarded. You're gifting a ton of money to someone you'll potentially hate at that point. I found there are 2 kinds of women: those who insist on marrying eventually, and those who don't care as long as you're together, they might or might not. I don't trust the former type at all. I can't possibly feel love for them, ever. There's always this gut feeling that something is not right.

HAHAHA!  Well, honestly, in hindsight I may not have gotten married if I'd known we would be childless at this point (but then again, maybe I would). We married (after a 16-year courtship) because my wife really wanted to start a family, and though I was always just kind of on the fence about that, I made the choice to tie the knot and start a family. In the end, for our own reasons, we decided not to have children, so yeah, in hindsight marriage wasn't totally necessary (I do find the whole institution to be troublingly coercive). But I do love my wife and there are certain things I feel she should have that she could only have as a spouse, including a survivor pension and my higher Social Security benefits. She's a good, loving, dependable woman. If things don't work out for some reason, like I said, I'll have more than enough with half my shit to live a good life.

[partgypsy]

Everyone is different, but when I got to point of wanting kids with my significant other, was not going to do it without us tying the knot. It's not just the financial commitment. It's the fact this person is acknowledging you are embarking on a life together, and that each has promised the other to be there for that person, in sickness and in health, etc. Not the same as cohabitating. If I ever get married again, it will be more of a personal choice thing.

[PoutineLover]

Yeah, I personally don't care too much for the institution of marriage, but it's something I want to do before having babies. I want them to be raised by two involved parents and without marriage it's that much easier for a dude to skip out. I know there's no guarantee anyway, but I consider it an extra level of commitment and intention to be in it together for the long haul. But definitely everything life, money and goal related should be discussed prior to marriage, and any major incompatibilities are probably deal breakers, no matter how much I love that person.

[Mesmoiselle]

Before reading all the replies and losing my train of thought...

My #1 goal is Financially Independent so as to make work optional. Because I hate "working" even if the work isn't all that bad.
I'm saving enough to make me FI, not my husband. He wants to work. So I'm saving enough to cover my share of the bills with a clear understanding that if the relationship dissolved or if a financial emergency cropped up, I'd dip into the work force as is needed for me.

Let? is a terrible word. That implies my partner would have control over me or was in some sort of parental role. I think we have a healthy idea of what our boundaries are in a relationship. I think some people forget that this is Two Individuals sharing their lives together, not owning one another.

[partgypsy]

I'm mulling a lot of similar things in my own life. My first "job" is to get divorced. After that, I have been seeing the same person since May. We are both pulled in multiple directions (he works for himself but works in 2 different towns, has 2 different residences, has a daughter, I have 2 kids and work full time, have a house). Sometimes it seems it would be easier if we lived in the same house, for logistical and cost reasons. But I'm just now getting my independence back. We would have to have a lot more discussions before something like that happened. It's hard for me to figure out how it will work. He is very busy but since he works for himself his schedule is much more flexible. I work a 9-5 type job, plus have my kids the majority of time. Sometimes I think even if it is more lonely, being single would be easier than trying to juggle a relationship during this time. Maybe once I am fully divorced things will be more clear.