It meant that I was always low on cash, and didn’t have the opportunity to go out socially as often, without “a gift” or “loan.”

It meant that I felt guilty about any vacation or purchase “we” made that “I” couldn’t afford because 1/3 more of my income (percentage-wise) went to bills than his did.

It meant I worried about money, and he never ever did. And I came to resent it.

Sometimes 50/50 does not mean 50/50, if you get my drift. I am definitely on the Suze Orman side of this. I am thrilled to see that there are so many women earning more than their male partners. But women continue to earn less than men, when gauged against their peers.

So you are earning 100K. A man doing your job is earning 117K in your same field. But your partner, who works in a different field, earns 40K. Well, guess how much a woman at his level and in his field probably makes? You got it. 17% less than he does.

Obviously emotions and pride, not to mention gendered assumptions of “roles,” has a lot to do with how a couple manages their money. I would never say there’s a “right” way and a “wrong” way. But I think both men and women need to wake up to the reality of what “fair” means in our contemporaneous world.

Fair means that if you make 2/3 more than your partner, you contribute 2/3 more to the communal pot. I would revise that for the partner who happens to (as is the case with many women I know) be the main wage earner AND the main house-tender. Unfortunately no one, including Orman, has come up with an effective way of putting a dollar value on housekeeping. I recommend taking the going rate of a local housecleaner. If a cleaning person makes $60 a day to clean your house, then factor that in to your “contribution,” and keep more of your cash for yourself.

I know so many people (men and women) who get royally taken advantage of by their pride–the desire to “appear” equal, even when it means indebting themselves in terms of money, time or energy.

Making 60K, I could never compete with my partner who makes 90K. If our rent is 1000, then the 500 I pay is a way bigger chunk of my take-home than his. And that’s not 50/50.

Just my two cents.

P.S. I will be happy, if and when the day comes that I make more money than my partner, to take over the heavier end of the stick. It would not make me think less of him as a man. As for how he feels about that…well, only time will tell.

It meant that I was always low on cash, and didn’t have the opportunity to go out socially as often, without “a gift” or “loan.”

It meant that I felt guilty about any vacation or purchase “we” made that “I” couldn’t afford because 1/3 more of my income (percentage-wise) went to bills than his did.

It meant I worried about money, and he never ever did. And I came to resent it.

Sometimes 50/50 does not mean 50/50, if you get my drift. I am definitely on the Suze Orman side of this. I am thrilled to see that there are so many women earning more than their male partners. But women continue to earn less than men, when gauged against their peers.

So you are earning 100K. A man doing your job is earning 117K in your same field. But your partner, who works in a different field, earns 40K. Well, guess how much a woman at his level and in his field probably makes? You got it. 17% less than he does.

Obviously emotions and pride, not to mention gendered assumptions of “roles,” has a lot to do with how a couple manages their money. I would never say there’s a “right” way and a “wrong” way. But I think both men and women need to wake up to the reality of what “fair” means in our contemporaneous world.

Fair means that if you make 2/3 more than your partner, you contribute 2/3 more to the communal pot. I would revise that for the partner who happens to (as is the case with many women I know) be the main wage earner AND the main house-tender. Unfortunately no one, including Orman, has come up with an effective way of putting a dollar value on housekeeping. I recommend taking the going rate of a local housecleaner. If a cleaning person makes $60 a day to clean your house, then factor that in to your “contribution,” and keep more of your cash for yourself.

I know so many people (men and women) who get royally taken advantage of by their pride–the desire to “appear” equal, even when it means indebting themselves in terms of money, time or energy.

Making 60K, I could never compete with my partner who makes 90K. If our rent is 1000, then the 500 I pay is a way bigger chunk of my take-home than his. And that’s not 50/50.

Just my two cents.

P.S. I will be happy, if and when the day comes that I make more money than my partner, to take over the heavier end of the stick. It would not make me think less of him as a man. As for how he feels about that…well, only time will tell.

For vacations and fun stuff, we usually do about 50/50.

For meals out, I pay about 3/4 of the time, and that is ok with me. I could go out more often without him (spend my food budget on myself only!) and pay for us only as often as he can afford to match, but this is better. He contributes a bit to groceries, but I doubt it equals what he eats. Close enough.

We don’t plan to live together until we are married (more due to his univ. housing contract than “morality”) but we fully intend to combine finances completely, giving us roughly equivalent spending money. If that doesn’t work for some reason, we’ll talk about it, and switch it up. We are in a temporary phase (aka, grad school) where he makes much less than I do.

Different things work for different couples. The most important thing is to find something both people are comfortable with, and both people being able to speak up if something isn’t working for them. A lot of people are comfortable with 50/50, a lot are comortable with income based splits. Whatever. If your realtionship is healthy emotionally, you should be able to make it healthy financially.

Now we’re doing a challenge to spend only a set limit for food per month which includes groceries, dining out and dates. It makes it a lot more even and it doesn’t matter so much who pays for what. It’s sort of like combining expenses, I guess, but we’re not living together. Since we eat almost every single meal together, it makes sense and we’re both spending what we’re comfortable with–plus we’re cooking together a lot more, and that’s more fun than going out to eat (I think).

We pool all our money, pay the bills out of that, and if we have any left over (hey, we're working on it!), we split it between savings & the 2 of us.

That way, we both get play money, & we can treat each other if one of us wants to do something that isn't in the budget, they can treat if they have the cash.

Why? That’s just the way it works.

There’s my 2 cents.

As for sharing expenses in general. I have come up with my own plan for the future which is similar to Kate’s comment, but involving a little more proportionality.

Each partner contributes a percentage of their salary to the common pot (say 65%). The other 45% goes to the individual for whatever he/she wants. Out of the 65% comes bills, rent, vacations, whatever else will be shared. Out of the individual 45% comes whatever the individual wants to buy. That way there shouldn’t be any resentment. I won’t have to pay for his comic-book obsession and he won’t be contributing to my Louis Vuitton affair.

At the moment, my guy pays for EVERYTHING we share, and I mean EVERYTHING. He refuses any of my offers to contribute, but appreciates it when I make a surprise purchase (a gift because i thought of him, sneak my card to the waiter, etc). Lilli, my boyfriend is the MAN I want.

Just remember ladies. Money issues are usually the cause of divorce, but the underlying issue is POWER. If you both agree on the power distribution from the get-go, you’re much more likely to have a successful relationship. Bottom-Line: COMMUNICATE. Have the awkward discussion before it’s too late.