[Grakel]

I'll never understand this, but I see it all the time. People should have shared money, and they should also have their own money. Does my wife like it when I buy myself expensive toys? I have no idea, it's irrelevant unless I stop covering the bills.

[asciimov]

It's for family budgeting and trust. We generally ask/inform if we are going to spend more than $100 on any given project/item. This helps both of us realize if it's a need or want. That way if I mention I'm going to get a new video game, I'll be stopped if its the third one in a month. Or if she wants new luggage, is it because it is needed or is it desired because it's a new color that is available.

You might make enough money to not really need this kind of consent. That's great if you do. For us, it is just a small check to help us get to our goals.

[magneticnorth]

Our solution was to sit down and decide what amount and cadence of "fun money" we can safely allocate to ourselves, and we can save or spend that individually.

In our case we have very different spending habits - I love to get a fairly regular coffee-shop latte & croissant, or fancy restaurant meals with friends, and similar things that savings gurus tell you will prevent you from ever retiring (my spouse's point of view).

My partner likes to spend way too much (imo) on "toys" once or twice a year.

We spent way too much time being obnoxiously judgemental at each other before we did the math and discovered each spending pattern works out almost exactly the same in aggregate over a year or two. Now we just set that aside and there's no judging because we know that the amount spent averages out to under what we decided was reasonable.

[Vinnl]

We do the same, but in reverse: we roughly figured out what we need for shared spending, and have both set up automatic transfers into our shared checking account from which those expenses are paid. Everything that remains can be spent at will without having to consult the other.

Edit: No kids though.

[oneeyedpigeon]

Yup, the same here down to the no kids. The tricky bit is deciding on what counts as 'shared spending' — my partner is insistent that it should cover necessary bills only, I think it should cater for almost everything we share including meals out, for example.

[momo_O]

I'd love to hear more details on how you are defining 'shared spending'. I've seen my parents have major conflict over control of spending and this shared account idea is very appealing to me, when I need it.

[pc86]

What do you want it to mean? There's no right or wrong answer but there's basically four fairly common ways to do it across the spectrum: 1) two individual accounts only and you pay everything separately; 2) joint account is for truly joint bills only - think mortgage yes, car payment no; 3) joint account is for "family" expenses - mortgage, cars, groceries regardless of who will eat them, etc.; 4) one joint account only and 100% of spending comes out of there.

#4 seems very common for my parents' generation (in their 60s). #1 seems like a logistical headache for something like a mortgage.

My ex-wife and I basically followed #2. This works fine for a lot of people. It worked fine for us until it didn't - unrelated to the OP, but if your spouse runs up a shitload of CC debt while you're married, you're responsible for half of it. If she cashes in a 401(k) and uses the entire proceeds to pay off said debt, you're responsible for half the taxes.

My current SO and I have discussed merging accounts will probably do something closer to #3 - each of us putting in somewhere between 50-75% of our income into a joint account, and the rest is personal money. But the joint account is for everything. Obviously joint stuff yes but basically anything that isn't 100% individual will come out of that account.

[oneeyedpigeon]

So, as mentioned, right now it's just essentials: mortgage and house bills really. Everything else we pay for individually — our own mobile bills, etc. We tend to alternate on things like meals out.

[fwip]

Yep, my wife and I each have separate checking accounts that are basically our own allowances, set up with an automatic recurring transfer every month. We're fortunate enough to have enough financial security to do this.

[fm2606]

My wife and I do the same thing. 99% of the time the answer from the other is "Yeah go for it, I don't care". But there has been occasions where one, usually my wife, says "we might want to wait on that" or something to that effect. It's worked for us for 20+ years.

[Breza]

I like that approach

[jhardy54]

Not being snarky: What's the alternative? Like, what would happen if you didn't do that?

I ask because my wife and I spend money however we like, and I think it'd be quite strange if she checked in with me before spending $150. Is there some useful context or previous over-spending that you're solving, or is it something you'd recommend for everyone?

[jollofricepeas]

People generally treat their partners like pets or property where they gain agency over each other’s wallets and body.

I could careless what my partner spends his or her money on or even whom they decide to sleep with. We treat each other as equals to make their own decisions together or apart.

If you’re with an irresponsible person then you either break off the relationship or agree to suffer with the consequences of their actions.

It works surprisingly well. Others should try it.

[saagarjha]

> even whom they decide to sleep with

I do not expect this to be popular.

[dgreensp]

There are many forms of consensual non-monogamy, including polyamory and others. I don’t know exactly how common, but I’ve heard 5%.

[yeahnah22]

I doubt I’m the only one a bit surprised by this post.

Do you live with your partner? How do you split shared or somewhat-shared expenses? Are your incomes equal? Who has the role of managing expenses? If you go out to dinner, who pays? What if you share a dessert? (.. etc - you get my point.)

I hope you’re willing to expand given your enthusiasm for your lifestyle, but more context will help.

[dgreensp]

I’m not the parent commenter, but, the same thing comes up with friends and housemates. Even married couples who are otherwise “traditional” sometimes keep their finances separate. You each pay rent. If you go on a trip together or buy something for the house, you split the costs. The shared expenses are the easy conversations. If anything, sharing all money obfuscates the harder ones.

[jollofricepeas]

Exactly this.

We have our own personal accounts and then one shared joint account for things we decide to buy together.

When we buy property, we buy it together or if one chooses to buy it alone that’s OK as well.

We also have a loose relationship document that we have created and regularly review to discuss things important to us.

- death - children - retirement - house chores - parenting - sex - commitments

Whatever style of relationship model you have overcommunication and active listening are extremely important especially as it deals with ones feelings, needs and fears.

ALWAYS handle tough conversations the same day (preferably) or week to avoid spiraling negativity and resentment.

[pc86]

Spending habits become exponentially more important the less money you make. If you make $125k as a software developer in a MCOL area you can basically spend whatever you want and if you're not downright reckless you're going to be fine.

If you're a couple whose combined income is $50k, spending is important and you simply can't afford to have your partner blow $80 on something because that could cause you to miss a bill, incur late/NSF fees, etc. My parents are elderly now and there's certainly a generational aspect as well but they made very little when I was growing up and they both knew every dollar that left the checking account. I make good money in tech and my SO is a physician so we just need to decide what portion of our income is allocated to joint expenses and the rest will work itself out. There's ways to optimize it of course but an NSF fee from the bank or a $30 late fee from Comcast is not really a concern for us the way they were both very real concerns for my parents.

[asciimov]

No, there are no consequences for not telling, at most we would be a little disappointed. This doesn't happen that often. Maybe once a month or so, and it's always "Hey I'm gonna by X for Y." "OK". Then we are a little less shocked when we see a $130 charge show up on our statement.

We do have saving goals, like for a house, paying off bills, etc. We aren't wealthy people my any measure either, so every bit counts.

Life is just different for us that don't make as much money and are trying to get ahead.

[prionassembly]

Maybe 100 bucks mean to him far more than 150 bucks mean to you, or 15k to Elon Musk, or 15 to someone struggling to escape homelessness.

[Breza]

This is also how my wife and I approach our money. We don't stop each other from having fun but we're aware of any big spending before it happens.

[bcrosby95]

Bills. And retirement savings. And college savings for the kids. Oh yeah, saving for the new stove.

I give myself $50/mo to spend on whatever I want. Anything else I mention it to my wife. Oh, and if it takes space in the house I mention it too.

[_AzMoo]

When your family has limited resources and needs to prioritise it's frustrating when somebody chooses to use those resources on frivolity.

[konschubert]

You can still have personal budgets, even if they are very small. Heck, when things are tight, even having 10 Euro personal "fun money" a month for each partner can give a bit of freedom.

[_AzMoo]

For sure, but the original article and the comment I replied to are talking about relatively expensive spends.

[blockyhead]

1200$, which were not squandered but invested.

You should do something about your financial situation if that seems like a lot of money to you.

Edit: how is it controversial that if you are poor, you should try to do something about it? To claim it is impossible to escape poverty is madness (unless you are sick or handicapped). Obviously the only way to escape is if you do something about it.

Even if you just earn 5$ per hour, you can try to save something. 1000$ would be 200 hours, not impossible. A better strategy would be to try to find a job that pays better, though.

[konschubert]

"Stop being poor"

That's how what you are saying sounds like.

EDIT: Even when you aren't poor, blowing 1K on a crazy project that might or might not pay off is something that a lot of couples would discuss first.

[pc86]

> To claim it is impossible to escape poverty is madness

This is an offensively wrong statement and suggests an extremely privileged and out-of-touch upbringing. There are numerous - hundreds - of articles explaining in-depth why it's very expensive to be poor in the US.

> Even if you just earn 5$ per hour, you can try to save something. 1000$ would be 200 hours, not impossible.

It really sounds like you're suggesting that someone in poverty should be willing to work for below minimum wage for 200 hours (5 weeks of full-time work) to save $1000 to "invest" on Kazakh emoji domain names? I would typically assume I'm misunderstanding someone since that's such an incredibly asinine comment, but given the first half of the comment I have to wonder if that's what you actually mean.

[psychiatrist24]

"This is an offensively wrong statement and suggests an extremely privileged and out-of-touch upbringing. There are numerous - hundreds - of articles explaining in-depth why it's very expensive to be poor in the US."

Nobody says it is not "expensive to be poor". But it is idiotic to claim it is impossible to escape poverty. Billions of people have done so in the last century.

"It really sounds like you're suggesting that someone in poverty should be willing to work for below minimum wage for 200 hours (5 weeks of full-time work) to save $1000 to "invest" on Kazakh emoji domain names? I would typically assume I'm misunderstanding someone since that's such an incredibly asinine comment, but given the first half of the comment I have to wonder if that's what you actually mean."

No, your interpretation is asinine. However, if you believe "emoji domains" or whatever have a shot at becoming a viable business, doing that is an option. Personally I would suggest trying to find a better paying job first. But if you can't, what would you suggest? Vote Democrat and hope for a minimum wage law, which will then make you lose your job?

Obviously, if you don't believe in the emoji business, don't invest in it. Find something else to invest in.

[satellite2]

Freedom

10EUR

[tikhonj]

I've never been that poor, but I've had limited funds in the past, and I can say that having even a small amount of money that you're psychologically comfortable spending on anything is a massive relief. Sometimes the best thing you can do in a situation largely out of your control is to consciously take back any amount of control you can, even if it ends up being more symbolic than anything.

[konschubert]

GP mentioned a situation where money is tight.

I’m glad you’ve never been in a place where 10 Euro fun money felt like a bit of a luxury.

[satellite2]

I don't know where you lived but I've been there and 10EUR doesn't make you feel free.

It's an amount lower than the volatility of basic life (running out of toilet paper...). You would have to save five months to buy a jeans.

10EUR remaining on your bank account is precisely the amount that makes you feel insecure and poor.

Either you live in a very poor country, either you have no idea what you're talking about and are just condescending.

[konschubert]

You must be mis-understanding me. I am implying that the basic necessities are covered by the common budget.

10 Euro buys you a coffee in a nice cafe a couple times a month. When you're poor, that's something!

[fwip]

"a bit of freedom" is the quote that you're arguing about.

[warent]

That goes a lot further in eastern europe than you might think!

[Breza]

This is a topic we covered in pre-marital counseling. The exact approach you pick matters less than making sure you both agree on it. My wife and I share all of our money and agree on big expenses before they happen.

[jiggunjer]

you must not have kids. If my wife and I have relatively large personal budgets to spend on ourselves, it would feel like we are denying our kids a nicer holiday or a nicer college education.

Unless of course you're rich enough to afford everything.

[sepin4]

I guess this is a problem only in USA. In Europe, the education is inexpensive enough with government funding and some effort from the child(which eventually pays back). Holiday vacations are usually for the whole family or organized by the school so this is planned expense. And in my opinion most of the expensive "toys" are usually not good for the child, like giving a sever year old an iPad/iPhone. I prefer to go with toys that spark creativity which usually are less expensive. That is not to say I would not buy expensive toys, however I believe that they should be given as rewards for memorable achievements or and to teach them what investment is. However I do admit that during the first five years the expenses for a child are huge, because most things have very short utilization lifespan - strollers, clothes, furniture, toys etc.

Instead of shared money with personal allowances, which works in constricting manner, we have shared goals approach to which we contribute whenever and however we can, which works in contributing manner. And we try to keep our budget aligned with our forecast for the goal or we reevaluate the forecast in case of unforeseen circumstances like the COVID pandemic. Of course we don't hit all of our targets but with time we get better at evaluating. Also any unspent money from a missed goal start as base for another goal.

[jiggunjer]

Way to miss the point. The examples I gave are just illustrations and not restricted to the USA. In simple terms: if you make a "selfish" purchase there is always an opportunity cost in terms of money not spent on loved ones. I don't see how parents can justify having a large personal budget unless their total budget is millionaire-level large. Have nicer and/or more frequent holidays instead, or get a larger house in a nicer neighborhood, hire a nanny perhaps.

[sepin4]

"there is always an opportunity cost in terms of money not spent on loved ones" seems to me that by that logic you don't "love" yourself and you put very little value to yourself and that you only serve your loved ones. Everything that I purchase and that brings me happiness in term usually makes the people around me that love me also happy. Either by improving my mood and so improving my social interaction with them or simply because they care about me. And most of the things that I can and will buy for myself are transiently valuable to them as well. I buy an Omega watch -> someday I will leave that watch to my kid hopefully with a good story and a loving memory. I get a gaming PC/console -> I get to spend time with my kid playing a game. I build a utility room into my garage -> I get to teach my kid how to build/fix something. I buy a telescope -> I can spend time showing them the stars/galaxies etc. I do not buy something like that when there are more pressing matters at hand. However if we are meeting our common goals the money that we earned are for us to spend in whatever way we want, including giving presents for each other(even in the form of money). The freedom to care for ourselves improves our care for each other.

[psychiatrist24]

Where by large you mean 1000$? Why would you have to be a millionaire to be able to afford that? What exactly do you plan to buy for your kids?

Expensive holidays are not automatically better, by the way. You don't need a luxury hotel abroad, maybe kids would actually have more fun going camping.

Also everybody seems to be missing the point that those 1200$ from the article where a business expense, not a "selfish purchase" as such.

[Grakel]

I have a one year old, and I grew up poor. We still don't have a lot. But at some point you don't have a money management issue, you have an income issue.

[Salgat]

It's very specific to each couple. My wife and I both trust each other and consult each other on big purchases. We also trust each other not to be controlling and judgmental. We have no need for separation of money. Not everyone can do this and that's also fine.

[high_byte]

I disagree on initial premise of having shared money...