To feel slightly annoyed at DH not getting a higher paying job?

[carrotstyx]

So dh is very well qualified. When we first met, I was always told by him how he was going to get X job and earn X amount by this stage of life etc. I believed him. It came around to applying for these jobs, and the market had all but closed up. So he accepted a different job as a stop gap. It's decently paid, but not very highly paid like he said he was going to get.

That's fine. His employer knows the market has changed so dh is at risk of jumping ship for far higher pay elsewhere. So they have offered to fund a masters course for him, which he has accepted, which means he would have to work for the company for 2 years or face paying back £20k. The masters isn't really worth that, and people in his industry have told me that it's a bit of a waste of time. Essentially, his employer has dangled a rotten carrot to keep him working for them as they wouldn't be able to replace him. There is no scope for asking for a pay increase as it's a huge multinational with strict rules.

I think the real reason dh wants to stay in the job is that it's 10am-6pm, and generally zero pressure. But before this, he was all for going for the very highly paid job and working long hours to set himself up in a lucrative career. This suited us as I work in a long hours high pressure job, so it sort of feels like he no longer aims for the stars because he knows that (hopefully) I am on the track to a high paying job, so he will still benefit from a high salary.

They could be living in a modest low rent house that he could easily afford by himself, living together doesn't mean benefitting from the higher income

His 4th one. What about the previous one? Or the one before that?

If you were an economist you might have learnt about “opportunity cost”. The opportunity cost of doing his masters is huge. About £40k according to the OP.

That sounds likely. You’ll reach for anything in an attempt to paint him as a Saint, won’t you?

It usually does though. It just doesn't suit your argument.

That could be true but it also could be true that they live somewhere he'd never be able to afford alone.

Yes, and I’m sure if they divorce he absolutely won’t go for half of everything as she’s the materialistic one.

If OP comes back and says she's paying all the bills and that they're living in a house he'd never be able to afford to live in alone whilst he's not contributing at all maybe I'll change my tune but I don't see that happening.

I'm taking things from the original OP, that she believed him when he said he wanted to be earning a certain amount by a certain time. That is not a promise to do those things.

I'm not reaching nor trying to paint him as a saint, I just think op is mean and being whiny

Are you suggesting she was wrong to believe him? Fuck me, the man can be a liar and still not be in any way wrong. Normally people say if you can’t trust someone you shouldn’t marry them, but OP DID trust him and she’s still the villain of the piece.

OP gave a brief overview, to demonstrate the types of conversations they’ve had. It’s clear, to anyone that isn’t trying to spin it to suit their narrative, that he allowed her to believe they were on the same page. She is not unreasonable to have an issue now she has discovered they aren’t.

I'm saying that most people have far reaching aspirations and that saying you want to do something by a certain time isn't an in stone promise to do that thing and that OP being disappointed that the dreams of a young man not being realised as if he promised her in no uncertain terms that he'd achieve those things is unreasonable.

Oh no, not whiny and mean!

Yes, we know. You refuse totally to acknowledge that he may be at the least slightly wrong, as you refuse totally to acknowledge that OP may indeed be justified in having an issue.

Conversely, those of us that believe OP is justified aren’t in fact condemning him if he genuinely changed his mind, but recognizing that it’s an unfortunate incompatibility. You can even pretend to consider OP’s viewpoint.

You aren't at all. You have said several things that aren't in the OP to try and make your argument.

Even OP is wrong for believing him, why shouldn't she have believed him? She did exactly what she said she would do.

I don't think OP sounds mean or whiny at all.

He promised her he would at least try. She believed he was actively going to be striving alongside her to maximize his income as she’s maximizing hers.

Where does it say anywhere he promised to try and have a high earning job? I missed it

living together doesn't mean benefitting from the higher income

Oh God, this is a frigging joke now.

I don't think anyone working full time and earning 40k a year is wrong no, how dare a man do something he's happy and content with whilst not actually doing anything wrong? I do think it's a bit daft to hinge a relationship on someone's "ambitious drive"

He also said that the current job was a ''stop gap'' so he was still agreeing with her when he got this job or at least making her believe he was still on the same page.

But no, he is completely innocent. OP is just a meanie.

Okay, he led her to believe he would try. He knew her goals and allowed OP to believe they were a team, both committed to becoming higher earners.

However, you’ve reached the point where you’re picking at word choice rather than addressing the actual point. You’re now either trolling or arguing for the sake of it.

You won’t even acknowledge that he would be in the wrong if he lied to her?

Okay hun, have a star.

Misleading OP is wrong. If a job isn't a stop gap, don't say that it is.

As long as you cannot grasp that it's not about £40k or ambition, but about an agreed shared vision for life together on which he is now defaulting, you will fail to understand what the problem actually is.

According to you, he'd be in the right even if he straight out lied to OP about his plans and probably isn't enjoying any benefits from an extra £120k household income a year. It's crazy the pretzels people will tie themselves in to castigate a high earning woman for the crime of not wanting the life they chose.

We have no evidence that it was shared, we have no evidence that he chose that job as a stop gap either. Again, no issue with high earning women, how could I have that issue. Show me evidence the job was meant as a stop gap, that the man did indeed PROMISE to try and earn more and that he's somehow failed to do anything.

Secondly, if living together and contributing equally to household costs, how is anyone benefitting from the others' money?

We have no evidence that it was shared

Other than the account of OP herself.

You're dismissing OP's own account about what happened as "no evidence" while making stuff up yourself. Then claiming he's not benefiting from £120k a year. And then the real issue: castigating OP at every turn for not being satisfied with what you've got. He's living a massively benefited life from her earnings and yet you insist that she's the mean one.

What's the point?

So are you going by the OP or not? Because the OP clearly says he accepted it as a stop gap.

An OP that is annoyed her DH isn't earning enough. Who decided the job was a stop gap? You don't think OP would try to paint things in her favour? (which by the vote, has failed)

I do think it's mean, the guy is in a low stress job and OP seems to resent that, nobody is making her work a high stress one but herself, being mad that someone else doesn't want to do the same is highly unreasonable, particularly they are working full time and not being a lay about doing sod all. We only have what OP says yes, but it's OP that is pissed off by how things are so you don't think it's even slightly likely that perhaps things have been embellished, that the "shared goal" was actually hers and that he is doing no wrong by not living up to his end up the bargain when he never agreed to do so. As I said, telling someone you want to be a high earner isn't the same as saying you will indeed become one and certainly isn't promising to. Who the fuck needs to promise to earn a certain amount anyways?

Once again, you're so blinded by the £120k (but you're not money focused, oh no) that you can't see what the issue actually is.

But you are demonstrating perfectly why OP was reluctant to reveal her salary.