What would you do if you married into money?

Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum

Help Support Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Who's paying the bills?

  • I'm male, my rich wife will pay

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • I'm male, I will pay my half

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • I'm female, my rich hubby will pay

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • I'm female, I will pay my half

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Other, please explain.

    Votes: 4 33.3%

  • Total voters
    12

TheRealCallie

Princess Pink Love
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
16,400
Reaction score
4,315
Location
My house
Let's say you married someone who has money.  I'm not talking billionaire or anything extremely substantial, but someone who doesn't really have (or ever has) to worry about money.  More to the point how would you handle the bills?  Would you expect your spouse to handle them all (or most) of it or would you cover half, more than half? 

I'm curious on how the answers will differ between the men and women too.  I know things are a little different now, but I think some still have old fashioned ways of going about things or even expectations of how they think a household should handle these matters.
 
Marry into money? I’d settle down and be a trophy husband for the rest of my days!


On a real note, I’d probably continue working and doing my share because I’d go crazy doing nothing.
 
I would pay all my bills, the same way I do now. And hell yeah, bring on the prenup.
 
I’m of the ‘other’ opinion and here’s why: I’m married - my hubby and I don’t have ‘his’ money and ‘her’ money - it’s ‘our’ money. Whatever money comes into the household is pooled together - whether he brings in more money or I do is irrelevant. So I would treat this hypothetical marriage the same way.
 
Respect my father in law and hopefully become mates.Re the money I haven't a Scooby do.

Thinking about though would still need to work and probably pay half and half on the bills.
 
Not sure if I've fully understood the question. But I would want her to be happy one way or another. If she wants me to contribute, then I would obviously contribute. But I wouldn't be threatened if she said she'd take care of it either.
 
I would honestly be better for her financial future if she downsized and didn't act like an aristocrat. In that: If you go spending all of the money, eventually there won't be any money.

I dated a rich girl once, that was an interesting first experience for me since I was born in near welfare.
She didn't really seem to give a damn about money, but also because her parents sheltered her too much she didn't understand the gravity of the consequences of her actions, either.

As for who pays for what, I'm all for 50/50, but I'm also no chaser, either. Basically how I look at it is: If I'm already working 47 - 60 something hours a week or more, if that's not enough production to make ends meet than we need to downsize on expectations and living arrangements, or I'll be more inclined to go at it alone with my 47-60+ hour a week shifts. I work to live, I don't live to work. The idea of mutual respect, mutual independence, and mutual freedom is appealing to me. I just happened to have a good business comprehension because I've had to fight an uphill battle financially my whole life. Or in other words: The way you learn how not to be broke, is to be broke for a long enough time that you figure out how to get your **** together and at least stabilize it. I live within a budget, that budget is my paycheck, if that budget gets exceeded unexpectedly, that's why I keep a savings account to balance it out later, and if it gets exceeded because I slip up like a *******, than I just own that and ask myself what the **** I'm doing wrong and start reviewing my statement/transaction history to try to narrow it down to a science.

As for her extra money and assets? Just put it into savings. We'll call it the "Oh ****" money. As in, what to use when unexpected stupid things happen that throw you a curve ball. Example: "Oh ****, the car's transmission died" or "Oh ****, we've gotta go to the hospital" or "Oh ****, the pets need to go to the vet." That kinda thing.

Or for a more realistic example:
Currently, my car is a piece of ****. I didn't really buy it, I sort of got it through a relative after my car died but I owe the guy a small sum of money for it (pretty small for car, like CL ads kind of small). However, because it's over 20 years old, it breaks a lot of the time.
So, I had to open two savings accounts for it: One to put the money aside to pay it off, and the other to keep a small base of repair funds in so that it doesn't really effect my checking account, and I just try to live minimally in the between.
 
Let's say you married someone who has money. I'm not talking billionaire or anything extremely substantial, but someone who doesn't really have (or ever has) to worry about money. More to the point how would you handle the bills? Would you expect your spouse to handle them all (or most) of it or would you cover half, more than half?

I'm curious on how the answers will differ between the men and women too. I know things are a little different now, but I think some still have old fashioned ways of going about things or even expectations of how they think a household should handle these matters.
It wouldn't matter to me either way, I still treat everyone fair and with respect. Money doesn't make a person. I'd still be the same person I am now. I'd work and pay for my things regardless, as well as his too. I'm a very good-hearted and giving person. Money wouldn't change my feelings towards anyone or anything, we'd just be more comfortable and less worried about the future. I'd always remain humble. People tend to forget that things can be taken away from them in a matter of seconds.
 
Someone who has money is probably into social Darwinism, and I'm not.
I believe the opposite - every time we've moved away from survival of the fittest, overall quality of life has improved and we've become more civilized as a species.
A person's worth shouldn't be mainly based on their ability to do the same thing over and over, there's much more to it than that.
It would probably be fundamental incompatibility with worldviews.

That said it would be nice to NOT have to worry about money.
It would be nice to NOT have to worry about survival. Then I could worry about actually living, instead.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top