Finances- why 50/50?

[Boxingshibes]

I know im lucky but I read so many threads about having to split everything 50/50 even when on maternity leave. I genuinely don't understand.
Why us it not 'our' or family money as you are a family?
When is got married 20 odd years ago i had a just above minimum wage as id lived abroad for years. Dh had a good job ( not mn good but around £40k)
I worked and also it was enough to support us, me and 2 children. I went back to work and we got a nanny as it was cheaper than nursery.
Now im the sole earner as dh is now medically retired. I'm on £70k but all our money is ours? I do pay for everything but it's not a problem as we are a family?

I read so many threads where people are using their savings/ going into debts just to pay 50/50. Why?

Barring abusive relationships, why?

@Imbusytodaysorry I don't really understand why you feel this way, this is what we did, we worked out how much we would need to cover my half of the household costs while I wasn't earning, then we saved that amount, so I could take as much leave as possible. My husbands salary is lower than mine so he couldn't just "make up the difference"

I do think it depends on relationship.

Met my husband I earned more, roughly the same for a while . After second maternity leave I took a slight step back in role husband now earned more. 15 years later we now roughly equal as about 3 years ago youngest in secondary stepped back up in my role and increased salary.

Husband shares parent load - he has done sick days, pick up from nursery , school runs etc Same with household responsibilities.

financially it all goes into one bank account, he does have a lot more pension than me. I have access to savings etc and know how much is in them.

My friend has a lot of family wealth - he has no mortgage. He is married and doesn’t expect her to meet him 50/50 because he wants a larger house in a specific location. They don’t pool money, but he can’t drive so she pays for the car and running of the car and food shop. He covers everything else. No children.

I guess it’s different for second families.

My friend has separate finances, second marriage no shared children but both have 2 from
previous. She prefers to keep it separate so no issues. Except until her eldest went to uni it impacted her finances due to his salary. Unlike his eldest who got full maintenance.

I earn more than DH and we do 50/50 too.

If you won the jackpot (presuming you mean the Euro millions or something crazy) then you wouldn't really be out providing your family something they didn't already have. You would be working for basically no real reason other than you presumably enjoying your work which is fine but ultimately quite selfish in nature. It would be like doing a time consuming hobby FT.

This is why it is so important to have the financial chat before kids/buying property/marriage. Everyone's view is so diverse and modern living hasn't made it easier.

From discussions I have had with my adult DC. They are looking for/have partners who earn roughly what they do, alleviating the issue of 50/50 but are more than happy to pay everything into joint accounts once children arrive but neither is really keen on being a 'trad man' and would prefer a partner to be a team mate.

There’s nothing wrong with doing anything time consuming outside of the home, particularly when (after the early years) children are at school, or in other forms of childcare.

Our whole purpose doesn’t have to be parent, or homemaker.

My job isn’t a distraction from my more real or valid responsibilities at home, it’s something for me that regardless of whether we needed the money or not, I’m entitled to.

Same here. I earn more but we each pay 50% of monthly expenses. We also share domestic duties equally. I’ve no time for women who think they should be subsidised just by dint of being female but I’ve also no time for men who think they can use money as a reason not to do household stuff. I wouldn’t accept anything less than 50/50 financially and domestically. I’ve been the lower earner in previous relationships where the partner wanted to pool money and I refused because I don’t like the idea of everything being joint. I wouldn’t want a partner to feel my money was theirs and I’m not willing to subsidise another adult so I wouldn’t expect that done for me.

We’ve always paid joint costs proportionate to our earnings; sometimes I’ve paid more, sometimes less. Joint costs - unlike for many I read about on here - include childcare and all children (and now grandchildren) related costs, holidays, and quite a lot more than just housing costs. It works fine for us, and has done even when one of us has a significantly lower/highet income than the other.

It usually boils down to control. Not just from Men, also women.

It can be about not losing your control on money
It can be about ensuring you control the other person in the relationship
It can be about controlling the lifestyle either party lives
It can be about controlling the level of abuse of the partner
It can be about controlling how easy/difficult it is for the partner to get out of the relationship.
It can be about controlling how much the partner knows about the money situation

Its all about control. I have always worked on family money and have probably put 4-5x the amount my partner has into the relationship. Every single penny is ours, not mine.

I completely agree. I was merely pointing out that someone that won hundreds of millions of pounds wouldn't be working to 'provide for their family'. They can do it just because they love it or find purpose in it or whatever other reason. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing it for disingenuous reasons and somehow the family is benefiting from the relatively small amount of money you would be earning.

It's interesting because I would say 2 people contributing the same to joint money is 50/50 whether you like it or not.

I put in 70% of the finances and have never considered this my money only but aware I've given us the quality of life I have and if my partner said we were 50/50 i would be disappointed.

Your husband can't pick up the finances on maternity when you have a mortgage that is based on your salary

What if their share is £3k and their husband earns £2.5k?

Not always disgusting

The way we run our money - salary into own account, same amount each in joint account to cover bill, shopping kids, joint things. Money in your own account is yours to do with as you wish- night outs, clothes, nails etc.

however if one of us has an extra large expenses - it would never be o you’ve spend all your money and I am hoarding mine.

Your husband can't pick up the finances on maternity when you have a mortgage that is based on your salary

But I think we're talking about men who CAN contribute more, but they just choose not to.

Are we? The OP is very generalised and black and white that 50/50 = bad and pooling = good when the fact is that people have different marriages and 50/50 genuinely does work for some couples.

Can it be abused? Of course it can but the same can be said for pooling finances too.

@Bargepole45 Working to give back isn't selfish and I would still do it even if I was a millionaire. I work with the most vulnerable young people in society who are currently unable to access education - how on earth could you see that as selfish I don't know!
Conversely, I find not working and relying on a man both lazy and selfish.
We will be rasing our daughter to always work hard, hopefully in a career she enjoys. I am proud to show our daughter a good work ethic.

When exactly did they start resenting it I wonder

I've no idea WHEN this changed but there's certainly been, IMO, a move towards men expecting women to do the majority of the household/child-rearing work AND work (often) full time too. Even if the second salary is almost entirely wiped out with child care costs. Plenty of them think they help round the house, but their input in minimal.

Personally, I think it started when two incomes were required to buy a half decent property.
From that point onwards, people were over leveraged even without children and their quality of life decreased
Adding extra mouths to feed, It’s almost as if the complete social contract has been destroyed
Women agreed to put up with men’s shit on the condition that they financially support the family at least for a period of time
And men’s circumvent loneliness by having families and paying for the privilege
It’s all gone utterly pear-shaped

This is what I tried to a say, a few hours ago, but you've phrased it far better. 'Social Contract' is exactly the right term

Making the woman pay 50/50 during maternity leave when she’s not working is financial abuse.

But I agree when you’re a family it should all be shared money because you’re supposed to be a team.

This is about proportionate spending though it touches on joint accounts.

I have never wanted a joint account and have been the higher earner in a previous relationship. Obviously because I didn’t marry a dickhead it was totally equitable when I was on maternity leave. There was some movement of money.

We have one agreement only and that was if it is a high risk investment product being contemplated to speak to each other first.

We are very practical people so spoke about finances at length before we got married. I advised my children to do the same.

Asking why would they agree to 50/50 on ML I think some women are so desperate to have children they will agree to almost anything. Being desperate for anything makes people vulnerable. It is financial abuse so why agree.

All our income goes into our joint account, which we had before we were married. All the bills get paid from that account, including when I was on maternity leave. When the children were young anything they needed such as clothes, school trips, swimming lessons, birthday parties etc was paid from the joint account.

We both have solo accounts which we transfer money to as necessary to spend how we want.

Anything left in the joint account each month is transferred to our savings.

I agree it's ridiculous, especially when women don't even earn as much as men for the same hours at work (and over 40 the gap widens even further). If we're not even 50:50 in the workplace, why are we pretending any of this is equal at all?

@OhMargaret Because the more women chose not to work due to "childcare responsibilities" the more likely the gap is to stay the same.
And for working mums, don't assume the role of Default Parent if your child is off sick etc. Dads should be equally as capable.