Marriage and money

miloice

Well-Known Member
May, I believe sm point is actually not suggest her to move out but to reflect on her basis and scope on what she is only considering. She took expenses of staying with her parents as a given but his expense as his personal liability.

One should consider all the factors and actual costs. Just because her parents are currently sponsoring the expense doesn't mean its something she doesn't take into consideration when computing the expenses and cost.
 


simpleman

Active Member
And May,

Allowances given to parents are not for paying your part of the household expenditure.

the allowances is for them to keep and spend.

You should add in your contribution.
 

simpleman

Active Member
May,

Serious? $200?

OK. How much is the total household electricity bill? How much is the total marketing expenses per month? And including toiletry. You still use soap? Or you buy your own?

How about Cable TV? NO. OK. Telephone? NO? OK. Internet? No.

There is also conservancy charge. No eating out at all? Or you are paying for them at all times when eating out?
 

thommy

New Member
If both of you are THAT calculative, please don't get married cos it won't last.

Money matters are one of the major factors behind divorces. Don't add on to the statistics.
 

kittenpie

New Member
SM,

yes. S$200. that is the incremental expense of a humble HDB household. this includes cable tv, land line, internet, conservancy.

because we have four siblings in the house, parents are young and working. things are divided into 6. expenses are shared among us.

if we eat out, the siblings share to treat the parents or take turns. we only cook dinner in the house as all of us eat out in the morning and afternoon.
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
Not everyone has 6 siblings. Makes me wonder. Should my wife be calculative with me since I have only 2 siblings while she has 5. So, all expenses will be split differently for hers as compared with mine?

May, do you get the point here? Its not the exact dollars and cents. But the double standards. Why should we use our own current context to compare and judge on our partners? This is totally ridiculous lah. One needs to realize a marriage is about unification of 2 individuals. They look into combined priorities and interests. The idea of sharing with our spouses has become a sponsoring of their expenses. I don't see the willingness to accept the person for who they are here.
 

kittenpie

New Member
Milo, 4 children, 6 working adults lah.

where got 6 siblings ... we the 1980s generation very few parents have some many children ...
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
My wife has 5
happy.gif
 

kittenpie

New Member
whatever it is,

for myself, if i contribute $X to subsidise the MIL, then the husband should contribute to my parents as well.

i am not going to subsidise whoever else's mum for whatever.

matter of principle.
 

simpleman

Active Member
May,

What principle.. we have to give and take.

So your incremental expense is 200. And his incremental expense is much higher at 1000. So if he contribute to your parents (at 50%) he would give you $100. And then you contribute $$500. So net net you pay him additional $400. Will this make you happy - matter of principle.
 

kittenpie

New Member
SM,

my example is this:

my household i now share with husband, we each take 50% 50% and the MIL is an incremental cost S$X.

then i will be supporting my MIL by S$X/2.

I would like to see my future husband ZI4 DONG4 and give ANOTHER S$X/2 to my parents, either in form or in cash, either regularly or during festivals.

Meanwhile i will continue to contribute to my parents same amount before i leave their house, simply because i love them.

but if the MIL is very kind-hearted, easy to get along with and helps out in the household, then i might not be so calculative.

or else living in the same house as in law is simply a nuisance.

this does not sound kind-hearted or socially acceptable, but that is my genuine view about this matter.
 

simpleman

Active Member
May,

Ha ha.. Now it makes more sense and reasonable. But this is not the same as Jazzy case. She just want to pay her incremental cost when moving in.. and not divide by 2 the current hb cost and add the MIL incremental cost.

As in difficulty with staying with MIL I can understand.. but that should not be measured in monetary terms .. although I know woman will give more when they are happy..

It really depends on what you see in your hb.. and the role he is playing.. I don't advocate staying with ILs if possible but for some people it may not be a matter of choice. So for you, either you stay single or marry someone with deceased parents or at least someone who won't need to stay with their parents.
 

kittenpie

New Member
SM,

you are right.

when a woman is happy, her floodgate of generosity bursts open.

but living with in-laws in itself is not cause for joy. that is why the floodgate does not open.
 

wat_are_dreamz

New Member
May: wah.... u v calculative leh. Are u an accountant? But honestly, i feel tat marriage is for a lifetime. As SM n milo say, there is no need for such clear lines to be drawn or 100% fairness in $.

In today's society, women want respect, freedom, their own career, independence etc. We earn our own keep n shd not expect the men to support us financially. Of course husbands can give wives $ for household allowance, buy nice bd prez etc. But the marriage vow includes sharing gd n bad times. Whoever earns more can contribute more. Allowance to parents, cny angbaos, hol trips can all come from joint savings a/c. Dun need to split so clearly.

Jazzy mentioned in her post tat she gives her parents a token allowance. Tat means a small allowance, just for the sake of giving cos her parents are both still working n can support themselves. She does not contribute to the household bills. Her HTB's situation is v different cos his father has passed on n his mum doesnt seem to be working, so the household bills n responsibility of caring for his mum falls heavily upon his shoulders. Jazzy has been aware of all tis during the dating period.

R/ships are not abt who gives more or less. Its abt ur comfort level of giving. Ur parent-in-law is akin to half a parent to u, if not a full parent. W/out ur PIL, ur hubby wldnt exist. So it is impt tat we open our hearts to care n love our in-laws. Easier said than done, but the mentality must 1st be right.
 

maddiejas

New Member
Is sharing the costs of the house not part of sharing the household bills and not providing for the MIL?

How come asking for opinions makes me feel like some åƒå¤ç½ªäºº?

matter of fact is i will continue to give my parents allowance even after i leave the house but he will not be paying that so called $x/2 amt to my parents.

Bottom line is monetary is only 1 factor of the whole equation. I should be looking at a bigger picture?
 

sgbabydoll

Active Member
Since there will be three persons in the household and since the mother belongs to him, why not you pay 1/3 and he pays 2/3. Fair?
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
Jazzy, not åƒå¤ç½ªäºº lah. Just pointing out your expectation is limiting the marriage and probably not aligned with your partner's. Asking you to look beyond only your own perspective alone but also his perspective.

No one can tell you what to do. But we can suggest pov and advises beyond what you have currently considered only. Its really to give you a variety and more diversified opinion. You make that final call yourself.
 

kittenpie

New Member
Since there will be three persons in the household and since the mother belongs to him, why not you pay 1/3 and he pays 2/3. Fair?
================================================

fair
 

kittenpie

New Member
oops,

does that mean the MIL's name would be in the title of the house in 1/3 case?

then better not lah ...

i tripped myself up

better stick with the original plan
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
What's with all the splitting? I stay with the inlaws, wife settle the utilities now as she was always being handling it. The internet as well. In every expenses that we incur, no need to question who to pay how much. Just feedback if its within our personal budget and then work out something comfortable. If her float in her account is not enough, I just do a lumpsum transfer to her. Likewise, if I incurred significant amount lately for some family expenses, she would volunteer to transfer some amount over.

We just maintain healthy balance on our own. No need to calculate because for any major purchase, we will just chip in. No more yours and my money. Better? No need to argue till the cow comes home over what is FAIR? *Yawns*
 

maddiejas

New Member
Milo, i like your scenario but its not for my case.

" I stay with the inlaws, wife settle the utilities now as she was always being handling it. The internet as well"

i am not saying i will not chip in for major purchases too.

Evon, i understand where you are coming from. But it's easier said than done.

Add> Doll, would it be different for either?

I m reading the forum now and then, and it does help me understand by reading different POV but didn't occur to me it will become this personal... to the extend i wished i didn't write here in the first place.
 

thommy

New Member
well, writing in a public forum to ask for views will always invite criticisms...you have to understand that.

it was never personal, at least to me. you asked for views and comments, you got it.

if it bothers you that much, perhaps you should refrain from posting in public forums next time.
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
Jazzy, remember your objective of writing in here. Make good use of the advises for that purpose. Everyone needs to exercise some level of personal filtering. Just be honest with yourself. No need to be emotionally upset over things mentioned.

Going back to your problem. I don't think its your problem or his problem. Both of you have differing views. Figure out if you guys are even suitable and if some common ground can be reached. Finances is one major reason for marriage breakdown actually. So, its not too late for you to evaluate things now.
 

sgbabydoll

Active Member
Jazzy, you pay for 50% of the house yet only have 33% ownership as there are three owners, versus you pay for 50% of the house and have 50% ownership. No difference to you?
 

maddiejas

New Member
Doll, you asked abt household expenditure and ownership makeup of the house?

ownership is 50-50, payment is also 50-50.

Note, 50-50 as a percentage of our salary, not 50% of the house each.
 

sgbabydoll

Active Member
"ownership is 50-50, payment is also 50-50." -- OK, this is pretty straightforward and I believe you have no qualms about this arrangement.

"50-50 as a percentage of our salary, not 50% of the house each." -- Jazzy, this is in reference to household expenditure?
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
What if one day, touch wood your family member is needing big financial burden over say medical reasons and you find it so tight to commit 50%. What then?

Or if either of you progressed so much in your career and earning 10 times more. Doesn't such 50% arrangement handicap your finances big time? What you need isn't strict rules but a partner you can be completely flexible and understanding with each others limitations and interests.
 

simpleman

Active Member
I wonder, why so uptight and with strict rules?

Milo is right. We need to be flexible and adaptive.. work-out something reasonable and acceptable..
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
why so uptight and with strict rules?

the success of the singaporean education to conform to policies and rules. Some are lost without such guidelines and often seek group consequences feel secure.
 

simpleman

Active Member
Don't always blame the education system. Yes, it is strict and we need to have exams. We have rules for this and that..

But we can always "educate" ourselves..
 

shirleypoise

New Member
I also agree that it's better to pay within our means. If I earn more then I wouldn't mind paying more for the household as well... It should not matter that much since it's OUR house.

If one is that uptight about it, one should be looking for a spouse who's flexible so that he/she wouldn't mind paying more.

Is it possible that cuz money is tight thus the need to be uptight?
 

miloice

Well-Known Member
sm, the education isn't just in schools. But the Singaporean mentality that is inculcated in our society and environment on the whole. How else to explain the many stupid posts in STOMP that reflects such idiotic ugliness in Singaporeans?

Simple personal thing like helping a partner with a bag is suggested as gayness by nobodies to the couples.
 

sgbabydoll

Active Member
"We love someone when the importance of his or her needs and desires rises to the level of our own. Our concern for the welfare of another exceeds, or becomes indistinguishable from what we want for ourselves" -- Gordon Livingston, M.D.

This is what I really believe for a marriage or relationship, not some fairness or percentage split. But have a feeling that this is not what Jazzy nor hb could appreciate.
 

sgbabydoll

Active Member
Aiyor, Milo, you are still at the handbag matter ah! Why you can't let go that people will comment whether you like it or not meh.
 

inix

New Member
Once the facade that is called wedding moves away, and the reality that is called marriage actually sets in, there will be 1 million possibilities to quarrel about.

Money is possibly the most common issue, with it being the easiest and the most difficult issue to resolve always. Nevertheless, since some people (Jazzy and her HTB inclusive) take marriage as a formulae where 1+1 = 2, than my humble suggestion is not to get married.

Because marriage is fortunately (or unfortunately to others) a myriad of character, education, childhood, lifestyle, experience, behavior, conduct and manner all rolled into one, where sacrifice, tolerance, mutual-understanding and most importantly of all, commitment is not only necessary, but essentially vital.
 

Top