Should I keep my mouth when I disapprove of DH's big purchases?

[Flingmoo]

Every few months or so DH will make big extravagant, frivolous purchases such as a new SLR camera, lenses and recently he's just randomly blown £800 on a drone. He's never had one before so to me it makes no sense to go straight to a high-end model rather than trying out a cheaper beginner one first. Last year I had to stop him buying an expensive telescope which I knew he'd just use a few times and after that it would just be a big bulky thing taking up space in the house.

We're not broke but if you add it all up over the years I'd rather put the money towards paying our mortgage, or something that we can all enjoy, like a nice holiday. He works full time and earns about double my salary, I work 3 days a week, if that matters.

We don't usually argue about money but I would really prefer it to be spent on something other than what are effectively grown up toys. On the other hand, it's his money to spend as he wishes... should I just keep my mouth shut? If I say anything he either gets grumpy about it, makes justifications for it, or just ignores it.

Maybe I should just shut up and buy myself an £800 handbag which he would disapprove of...

[Cabrinha]

Oh I totally agree with that!

I went 4 days a week with my child for a year or so. I wanted that for her, but also for me. We both agreed to not wanting her in nursery 5 days, so I cut my share of the mortgage proportionally that year.

We earned similar, so that year he earned more than me. We'd never shared our money - worked for us. But we were both on good salaries that weren't VASTLY different.

I actually had more disposable income as he spunked £500 a month on car finance which I'd never do.

So I'm certainly not saying everyone has to have a joint account.

It's not the exact situation here that makes me it's that there appears to be no discussion or agreement about it.

[Cabrinha]

And as their salaries sounded similar when FT, this sounds like the common situation where it didn't need to be talked about before a change of lifestyle, new baby. And now all of a sudden it's an issue.

[MysteryMan1]

I don't get 'household income'. Each person has a salary and putting kids and maternity to one side, should contribute evenly to the general pot. Anything left over is theirs to use how they please. If one party has less income, then hard luck.

Spending money on the household is a necessary evil but hardly that fun/exciting after putting in hard graft art work. It's why people want someone on an equal financial footing to themselves.

In this case, I would keep quiet provided he is contributing his bit and no one is going hungry.

[HolgerDanske]

Wow.

Don't really know what to say to that load of rubbish.

[Joysmum]

Anything left over is theirs to use how they please. If one party has less income, then hard luck

I value my DH as an equal to me. Why should I have valued him at what his employer did, he's not my employee!

Marriage is a partnership, and that started for us when we moved in together. I earnt 6 times what he did as he was on his apprenticeship and I was working a 60 hour week to tide us over

If we'd not have gone for fairness, he couldn't have done his apprenticeship and now be top of his game, I couldn't have trained for my profession and we'd both be a lot worse off for being as selfish as you are and our marriage would not have survived if we'd been complete twats about money as you are!

[TracyBarlow]

Who was looking after his children while he went out and did these favours for his grandma and earned this extra bonus money at work?

[MysteryMan1]

Believe me I am not a twat about money but a realist. I don't ask any questions and vice versa. As long as you both put in to pay for the joint expenditures, what's the issue? Everyone works hard and I wouldn't want any of what my partner earned therefore what she chooses to spend her money on is her business. I don't expect to be reliant on anyone and don't expect anyone to be reliant on me.

[rollonthesummer]

What if one of a couple is part time and looking after the couple's children? Should they still contribute 50% of the household bills?

[Joysmum]

The issue is that if you value your partner as having the same worth as you but your employers don't, it would be ridiculous to accept their valuations on the contribution to your marriage as being equal to the amount you get paid.

[zozzij]

Believe me I am not a twat

Um...

[AnotherGirlsParadise]

I have a thing for kitchen gadgets - it's my only real financial vice. I earn considerably less than my DP, yet I find all his spare cash goes on tat like comics and action figures, and mine goes on the kids and the house.

He whinged about me spending £60 on a food processor last year. I replied that he'd spend that on toys that do nothing but sit in a cabinet, whereas at least MY purchase benefitted the whole family. He shut up after that.

And I'm intrigued... a drone? What FOR?

[MysteryMan1]

Doesn't this thread kind of prove my point? Having a central pool is all well and good until you don't approve what the other party does with it...

Everyone wants to be able to spend on some luxuries which however you want to split the finances should be allowed. Provided all bills etc. are paid. It's what keeps many people sane. Having to spend every penny you earn on the family may be fine for some but most people would want some cash for themselves I would have thought.

Having to account for decisions to your partner soon gets wearing as the OP no doubt knows.

[fourtothedozen]

Having to account for decisions to your partner soon gets wearing as the OP no doubt knows.

Depends on the couple.
Joint finances work really well for us.
My OH earns twice what I do, but the only reason he is able to do this is that I do most of the childcare, housework and cooking.
So he doesn't see his money as just his- it's ours. He can do overtime at a moment's notice or take off on a business trip without much thought while I keep the logistics of home life running.

Luckily neither of us are very materialistic, our earning get put into a central account that we both have access to. We spend what needs to be spent and save the rest, but we never have disputes over money. If we are particularly flush one month we will share it around, go for a nice meal as a family or have a little treat for everyone.

[CerealEater]

I never get the childcare argument, I look after my children as I am their parent. I don't do it as a huge favour to DH, likewise if he's home and I'm not he does he parenting.

I can't imagine having to justify spending my wages on non essentials, different if bills aren't being met but an adult who is earning should be allowed to shop without asking permission. Very controlling.

Likewise birthday or Christmas money, I can't imagine saying when asked what it was used for "oh DH makes me hand it over". The person wants to know it was used on something the person it's given too wanted.

[venusandmars]

I totally get that one partner shouldn't be spending willy-nilly (just because they are the major wage earner) while the other is scrimping and saving to get by. And I believe 100% that decisions about family and caring and consequent impact on finances must be discussed and agreed and adjusted, and fair.

However, I don't understand that small amounts of money spent regularly on books or meals out with friends counts as a 'necessity' while purchasing a camera is seen as a waste. Surely those are simply different priorities about what to spend additional (spare) money on? The OP's spend is minimised as only £10 to £20 per week, but if her dp 'saves' the equivalent and then spends it on a capital item for £400 it is seen as somehow stealing the family money?

If the couple agree together that family holidays or paying more towards the mortgage are priorities then both should be doing something about that - e.g. she saves extra £5 a week, he saves extra £10 per week.

[MuffMuffTweetAndDave]

Mysteryman you mention that you think everyone should contribute evenly to the pot 'putting kids and maternity to one side'. What does that mean? I assume evenly means equally. Do you think those things are irrelevant, or that they should be taken into account? It's not very clear. I hope the former, since when one partner is on statutory maternity or paternity pay, it's quite feasible their entire income wouldn't be enough to pay 'their' half. After all, a parent who is receiving statutory pay beyond the 6th week of leave would be on £600 a month. I consider our household expenses to be relatively low at about £1350 a month, but that would mean the person on statutory literally isn't receiving enough income to make an equal financial contribution. What about 'putting kids to one side'? Do you think if one partner goes part time to do some childcare and the other continues to work full time, and their incomes are therefore different, that the financial contribution should still be equal even though the childcare contribution isn't?