Marriage

[haha]

One good budgetary aspect of getting married is a reduction in the hooker/stripper spending category. Heck, some DW's force that category to near zero!

Very few guys who can spell "who" and wear matching socks are spending any money on hookers or strippers.

The world is full of attractive, friendly single women.

Ha

 

[Arifriekinel]

OK, so what I'm getting from you guys is less that marriage isn't money-draining in itself, it's just the rarity of finding someone with the same wants and needs as you.

But if you're both working, you can still have a lot more to save. It seems to be the gamble of relationships. Thanks! It's interesting to hear so many different takes

Money is also much more of a "power/control" issue. You start comparing what each other makes, and that can bring resentment if it used to justify one's desire over the others desire. Being asked or told not to spend as much for certain things, and that can bring resentment - or even worse, spending behind the others back.

My relationship right now is a unique and good situation. I've been with my almost clone for the last few years. Both LBYM, he had a ROTH IRA before we even got together. As far as the jealousy thing, all of our money is completely combined and we have no idea how much we make separately because we own a business together. We leave all of the money we don't use in the business and just plan to split it 50-50 if we split up.

As far as an hour to change clothes, as a woman, I've never done that and couldn't understand it XD I'm young enough that Boyfriend and I can wear the same shirts, so we both just have our t-shirts in a dresser in our apartment, and we grab two off the top and put them on, and we're good to go! Never done make up or jewelry, and I'm still to afraid to use public restrooms, so I've got no experience in those yet

 

[easysurfer]

If you are single, you don't need to ask permission to do things... like change the channel on the remote.

But I think overall, society views the connotation of happily married higher than happily single --Just a fact of life.

Also keep in mind, married people tend to be happier (at least they say so). Married people tend to live longer. But also married people can have messy divorces.

So take your pick on what path you wish to walk.

 

[tmm99]

I always thought more men say being married is more expensive because their wives made less money (which is statistically true).

 

[Walt34]

One big issue is that married couples need to compromise and do things to meet the wants and needs of the other spouse. That is not at all a bad thing, but it is more costly.

It can be and I suppose that's why some spend more combined than either would alone.

I guess I got very lucky in that DW's priorities and mine are very closely aligned so we haven't had a disagreement over money - which is really about priorities - for over a decade.

 

[frayne]

Very few guys who can spell "who" and wear matching socks are spending any money on hookers or strippers.

The world is full of attractive, friendly single women.

Ha

Amen and just because you are married doesn't mean you have to turn in your man card. I do whatever the hell I want as long as my wife is OK with it.

 

[heeyy_joe]

The truth: "I would have saved more except I spent it".

 

[bbbamI]

I am just wondering why it is that marriage seems to cost more than living single according to the people on this board?

You inherit[-] out-laws[/-] in-laws.

 

[Htown Harry]

Theoretically, a two income HH ought to raise chances of reaching FI and ER.

This is a fact. If all things were equal, financial assets for singles at retirement ought to be half of those for married couples. The statistical reality is a much greater than 2:1 advantage to married couples, at least when the measure is accumulated savings.

Retirement: The married/single divide | Vanguard Blog

Financial savings of households with those aged 65–69 in 2008​

From the blog story:

One possible explanation is divorce...

Another explanation is being single throughout life...

Another likely culprit is early death of a spouse...

One lesson to draw from this data is that retirement security is more than accumulating savings. You need also to protect against large, unexpected claims...

The academic paper on which the blog post is based is here:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~bventi/Papers/w17824.pdf

 

[Sue J]

If DH was single he'd spend just about everything and save next to nothing. Lights left on in every room, fans blowing on high and tv or radio left on while the house was empty. It's just his nature.

If I was single I'd be sitting in the dark except for the light of my computer as I fine tuned the spreadsheet showing how much I saved that day, that week, that month and what I expected to accumulate in the future.

In some ways we are opposites, but together we are a great team. We balance each other in a lot of ways. We need each other to bring us from our end of the spectrum toward the middle. Luckily, we don't argue about our differences, we try to respect them.

I don't care if it costs us more to be married. Taxwise, it's cheap for us to be married filing jointly with him retired and me with a very part-time job.

 

[omni550]

This is a fact. If all things were equal, financial assets for singles at retirement ought to be half of those for married couples. The statistical reality is a much greater than 2:1 advantage to married couples, at least when the measure is accumulated savings.

Retirement: The married/single divide | Vanguard Blog

Financial savings of households with those aged 65–69 in 2008​

From the blog story:
The academic paper on which the blog post is based is here:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~bventi/Papers/w17824.pdf

I recently read (sorry, I cannot recall the source but it was a in a paper having to do with retirement planning and planning for the eventual death of a spouse) that if the cost of living for singles indexed to 100, then for couples it is around 125 to 130. (The paper didn't get into all of the details but I think a huge chunk of this is savings in the cost of housing, among other things.)

Thus, two cannot live as cheaply as one, but it's a whole lot less than double the cost of a single.

omni

 

[Amethyst]

I may start a thread on "What is a man card,anyway?" I always thought having one meant being a stand-up guy - reliable, courageous, principled, etc. Sounds like quite an asset to marriage. (I know, I know...as usual, I don't quite "get the meme," as the young folks say )

Amethyst

Amen and just because you are married doesn't mean you have to turn in your man card. I do whatever the hell I want as long as my wife is OK with it.

 

[Arifriekinel]

I may start a thread on "What is a man card,anyway?" I always thought having one meant being a stand-up guy - reliable, courageous, principled, etc. Sounds like quite an asset to marriage. (I know, I know...as usual, I don't quite "get the meme," as the young folks say )

Amethyst

All I can say is I'm glad my generation has less of a rift between guys and girls. The things my parents and in laws talk about in relation to how men and women behave do not typically apply to us, it seems, so hopefully the 'man card' thing never does either.

 

[RunningBum]

I may start a thread on "What is a man card,anyway?" I always thought having one meant being a stand-up guy - reliable, courageous, principled, etc. Sounds like quite an asset to marriage. (I know, I know...as usual, I don't quite "get the meme," as the young folks say )

Amethyst

Nah, it's more like someone telling you to "turn in your man card" in response to you saying something like:

"I couldn't watch the football game because my wife dragged me out to go furniture shopping."
or
"I thought 'Room with a View' (or some other chick flick) was a really well-done movie."

 

[walkinwood]

For us, marriage was a good thing financially. We lived together for less than we could living separately. Sharing household chores also allows for more free/work time for both. Taking vacations together is also cheaper.

Tax rates were higher since we both worked, but overall, we believe it was positive.

 

[Amethyst]

Mr. A. likes Room with a View. But he also likes Die Hard and that ilk, so I guess it balances out

Nah, it's more like someone telling you to "turn in your man card" in response to you saying something like:

"I couldn't watch the football game because my wife dragged me out to go furniture shopping."
or
"I thought 'Room with a View' (or some other chick flick) was a really well-done movie."

 

[donheff]

I suspect most of the complaints about the negative effect of marriage on wealth are from people who divorced and ended up without a pot to piss in. That is often guys complaining but the impact is generally worse on women. Absent divorce, two working spouses can save up a lot more towards retirement than either could singly. And their costs as a couple are far less than two single households. And, if one of them dies, their estate passes to the other free and clear. If DW and I got divorced now we could both do OK financially but no where near as well as we can are doing together.

 

[RunningBum]

I suspect most of the complaints about the negative effect of marriage on wealth are from people who divorced and ended up without a pot to piss in. That is often guys complaining but the impact is generally worse on women. Absent divorce, two working spouses can save up a lot more towards retirement than either could singly. And their costs as a couple are far less than two single households. And, if one of them dies, their estate passes to the other free and clear. If DW and I got divorced now we could both do OK financially but no where near as well as we can are doing together.

Not all. I don't feel like getting into the story but we didn't have the same views on spending, and I didn't do a good job of making my case, so we battled debt pretty much the whole time. Once we divorced, I got out of debt and stayed out of debt, even with child support.

 

[RunningBum]

Mr. A. likes Room with a View.

If he admits this, he needs to turn in his man card.

 

[LoneAspen]

I find this discussion interesting. I'm in my mid 40's and have never been married, mainly because I am VERY independent. I figure I have to endue so much compromise in my professional life (aka, a job) that at this time in my life, I refuse to accept any in my personal life.

In my job, I have to answer to a boss all day long, five days a week. But when I'm on my time, I do what I want, when I want, and spend money on whatever I want, and I never have to ask anybody's permission. I like that.

I've often wondered if/when I retire, if I would be willing to then accept compromise in my personal life, since I wouldn't have anymore in my professional life. I'm not sure I could. I've grown to enjoy my freedom.

One thing is for sure, however, and this relates to the financial aspects of this forum topic...if I ever did get married, two things would be a given:

1. No comingling of income or funds. There would be "ours", "yours", and "mine". The "ours" bucket would be funded from both incomes and used to pay common expenses. The other two would be each person's own money and used for whatever they wanted. I've personally seen family members' marriages implode because of mixed funds and financial arguments (not to mention divorce), and I would never go down that path.

2. Prenup would be required. Assuming I manage to accumulate enough over the next couple years to retire and quit the 9-to-5 world, I am not putting that at risk for any person. I have a sister who's been divorced three times, so I've seen ugly divorces play out in the family in person. Not putting myself at risk of that, no matter how much I feel I love the other person. Prenup protects us both, and if that's seen as un-romantic...tough. I am not going back into the working world due to losing everything I have in a messy divorce.

I guess it's a good thing getting married isn't a life goal of mine. I doubt these sentiments would be seen as desirable traits by the fairer sex If it ever happens, fine. If not, I'm okay with that, too.

 

[Arifriekinel]

LoneAspen -- Not much of a romantic I see I can only hope the relationship I've been in for the last couple years works out. Everything is shared, our business is shared, and we came into the relationship with the same interests, so there's been no compromise yet, except for which countries we plan on traveling to first! He likes East Asia, I like South America

The longest lasting relationships I've seen seem to involve not much compromise at all, so hopefully you marry a clone if you ever decide to jump!

 

[heeyy_joe]

Prenup: "I'll show you mine if you show me yours".

 

[photoguy]

(The paper didn't get into all of the details but I think a huge chunk of this is savings in the cost of housing, among other things.)

If I were single, I'd have no problem just renting a room or getting a very small micro apt/condo. I look fondly back at the days when I spent only a few hundred dollars/month on rent for just a room. Although we don't need a lot of space, I think with the wife we will need at least 750 sq ft or so.

 

[haha]

I never chafed over compromise until our children were up. At that point, it suddenly seemed a lot less attractive.

The financial hit of divorce after retirement is big, but as the saying goes, it's worth it.

I think I was willing to be a total team player, when there was the whole team. I guess to me a couple does not meet the requirement, though it can be fun.

Ha

 

[Hamlet]

Getting married help my wife and I financially, until we had our daughter.

Daycare is a brutal expense, but not one that I ever feel like skimping on.