Activism Change

Him vs. Us (sorta long but I need opinions please)

Question:

"Lisa" Lisaster…@blerg.com wrote: >Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the >irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs?

Many years ago, wife perhaps had good reasons to turn over so much control of her life to other. Perhaps it helped her cope and even survive. But that was then, and this is now, and the circumstances are much different than they were many years ago. So what was one a good coping strategy perhaps isn’t the best strategy for today in her changed circumstances. Wife would be well advised to increasingly foster more and more of her own independence, and all the more so if husband has a track record of not being a good and just decision maker with the household finances. Consequently, there are at least two recommendations: First that wife hold on to the money she now has, and to see if perhaps she can more justly handle the finances than husband has been doing to date. And second, that wife go out and get herself a job — inspite of husband’s wishes — so that she can better have her own independence, and the satisfaction which comes from making one’s own money, and so that she is no longer so much an unwitting victim of husband’s less than magnanimous ruling over the household finances. Will husband be pissed off about all this? Predictably yes. And why not. After all, his efforts to date all seem to have been to subordinate wife so that he can unilaterally control the household finances just to his own liking. Rather than making efforts to foster his wife’s independent growth, husband has been observed to only foster her dependence on him — a very covert, but not altogether uncommon ploy to maintain unilateral power and control. So perhaps little surprise if wife’s efforts are now going to undermine his monopoly. Nevertheless, anyone who has wife’s best long term interest at heart will counsel and advise there toward whatever routes best help her to gain more control over her own individual life. And those who genuinely love her will foster and support and encourage her towards greater independence as well. And any others should simply be avoided like the plague if only to preserve her mental health and to keep her spirit from eroding away. And that’s about the best I can say about all that. CJ

Response:

"Nella" rr7…@dragonbbs.com wrote: >Woman gets job.

ROTFLMAO. Sometime others can say things infinitely more succinctly than I can. Nella’s response here is a great example of that. CJ

Response:

"TommyJ" <tommyj232…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:3D16DEB3.4030806@yahoo.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Lisa wrote: > > "Doug Anderson" <ethelthe…@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >>Failing that:  woman leaves this sorry-assed man and moves back to > >>some civilized country. > > *LOL*  :) > > Oh that sounds so good in theory. > > Here’s what’s holding me back from it. > > This would be my second divorce…  I’d be a fallen woman, go back to my > > homeland to live briefly but very shamefully in a homeless shelter, get put > > in public housing and receive food stamps before I could get back on my > > feet…which I’m thinking would take anywhere from 1-5 years. > > A 34 yr. old poverty stricken divorcee with two children who have to suffer > > through it with me.  Not a comforting prospect.  Call me cowardly for not > > leaping forth and embracing the thought with a smile. > > But thank you… and Hi.  I’m getting all the posts again it seems. > I hope my previous post is of some help. > I personally knew a couple that was in your situation, except it was > kind of reversed. He too made a decent wage, but it wasn’t enough to > maintain the standard of living she wanted. She spent money on the most > frivolous things.  Their problems went beyond just financial, but money > issues contributed greatly to their demise.  He worked 2 to 3 jobs over > the span of 20 or so years to try and pay all the bills, -which he never > could. She would work off and on.  His health began to deteriorate and > eventually he couldn’t hold down a job. They separated and later > divorced. A few months, maybe a year later, he just snapped and has been > in an institution ever since. > Not only was she not good a taking care of money, she was terrible at > taking care of herself. She smoked, had awful eating habits and when she > started to get sick, avoided going to the doctor because she didn’t have > the money. > To make a long story short, she died in her mid fifties. He’s in his > late 50’s and might as well be dead. He barely gets out of bed during > the course of a day. Fortunately, their kids got out of the house before > things really got bad. > Your situation might not be nearly as serious, but theirs wasn’t either > at first. One to 5 years of poverty is better than what happened to them.

*mouth dropped open*

Response:

"CJMorgan59" <cjmorga…@aol.com> wrote in message

news:20020624052302.16588.00000578@mb-cm.aol.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Lisa" Lisaster…@blerg.com wrote: > >Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the > >irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs? > Many years ago, wife perhaps had good reasons to turn over so much control of > her life to other. Perhaps it helped her cope and even survive. > But that was then, and this is now, and the circumstances are much different > than they were many years ago. So what was one a good coping strategy perhaps > isn’t the best strategy for today in her changed circumstances. > Wife would be well advised to increasingly foster more and more of her own > independence, and all the more so if husband has a track record of not being a > good and just decision maker with the household finances. > Consequently, there are at least two recommendations: First that wife hold on > to the money she now has, and to see if perhaps she can more justly handle the > finances than husband has been doing to date. > And second, that wife go out and get herself a job — inspite of husband’s > wishes — so that she can better have her own independence, and the > satisfaction which comes from making one’s own money, and so that she is no > longer so much an unwitting victim of husband’s less than magnanimous ruling > over the household finances. > Will husband be pissed off about all this? Predictably yes. And why not. After > all, his efforts to date all seem to have been to subordinate wife so that he > can unilaterally control the household finances just to his own liking. Rather > than making efforts to foster his wife’s independent growth, husband has been > observed to only foster her dependence on him — a very covert, but not > altogether uncommon ploy to maintain unilateral power and control. So perhaps > little surprise if wife’s efforts are now going to undermine his monopoly. > Nevertheless, anyone who has wife’s best long term interest at heart will > counsel and advise there toward whatever routes best help her to gain more > control over her own individual life. And those who genuinely love her will > foster and support and encourage her towards greater independence as well. And > any others should simply be avoided like the plague if only to preserve her > mental health and to keep her spirit from eroding away. > And that’s about the best I can say about all that.

I knew I could count on you. Thanks.

Response:

"JWB" <jwbremovethesefourwords3…@excite.com> wrote in message

news:yfFR8.60666$GY.22011154@twister.nyroc.rr.com… > Maybe the woman should move on with *her* life and stop worrying about what > the man will do.

Is it healthy in a marriage to live separate but parallel lives?  I mean, whats the sense of being married at all if you’re going to do that?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Lisa wrote: > "Doug Anderson" <ethelthe…@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>Failing that:  woman leaves this sorry-assed man and moves back to >>some civilized country. > *LOL*  :) > Oh that sounds so good in theory. > Here’s what’s holding me back from it. > This would be my second divorce…  I’d be a fallen woman, go back to my > homeland to live briefly but very shamefully in a homeless shelter, get put > in public housing and receive food stamps before I could get back on my > feet…which I’m thinking would take anywhere from 1-5 years. > A 34 yr. old poverty stricken divorcee with two children who have to suffer > through it with me.  Not a comforting prospect.  Call me cowardly for not > leaping forth and embracing the thought with a smile. > But thank you… and Hi.  I’m getting all the posts again it seems.

I hope my previous post is of some help. I personally knew a couple that was in your situation, except it was kind of reversed. He too made a decent wage, but it wasn’t enough to maintain the standard of living she wanted. She spent money on the most frivolous things.  Their problems went beyond just financial, but money issues contributed greatly to their demise.  He worked 2 to 3 jobs over the span of 20 or so years to try and pay all the bills, -which he never could. She would work off and on.  His health began to deteriorate and eventually he couldn’t hold down a job. They separated and later divorced. A few months, maybe a year later, he just snapped and has been in an institution ever since. Not only was she not good a taking care of money, she was terrible at taking care of herself. She smoked, had awful eating habits and when she started to get sick, avoided going to the doctor because she didn’t have the money. To make a long story short, she died in her mid fifties. He’s in his late 50’s and might as well be dead. He barely gets out of bed during the course of a day. Fortunately, their kids got out of the house before things really got bad. Your situation might not be nearly as serious, but theirs wasn’t either at first. One to 5 years of poverty is better than what happened to them.

Response:

"CJMorgan59" <cjmorga…@aol.com> wrote in message

news:20020624052625.16588.00000579@mb-cm.aol.com… > "Nella" rr7…@dragonbbs.com wrote: > >Woman gets job. > ROTFLMAO. Sometime others can say things infinitely more succinctly than I can. > Nella’s response here is a great example of that.

Yes.  I noticed.  :)

Response:

"Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message

news:af6j6k$94l$05$1@news.t-online.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Amy Lou" <amylou…@bigpond.com> wrote in message > news:MCzR8.19766$Hj3.62197@newsfeeds.bigpond.com… > > "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message > > news:af68qa$nqg$01$1@news.t-online.com… > > > Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like > she > > > has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the > > > first time thinks, no. > > > Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs > > > everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. > > > Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he > > > planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on > > time. > > What is a boon? > a benefit – in my case, money

You asked: "Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs?" My answer is a definite "no". Maybe woman could explain to husband that seeing as she has no say over the money he brings home, he will be having no say over the money she has managed to bring home. Maybe she should keep it as emergency get-away money. Maybe she should let him know that she is thinking of leaving because she feels uncared for. Amy

Response:

"Amy Lou" <amylou…@bigpond.com> wrote in message

news:f7CR8.19877$Hj3.62620@newsfeeds.bigpond.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message > news:af6j6k$94l$05$1@news.t-online.com… > > "Amy Lou" <amylou…@bigpond.com> wrote in message > > news:MCzR8.19766$Hj3.62197@newsfeeds.bigpond.com… > > > "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message > > > news:af68qa$nqg$01$1@news.t-online.com… > > > > Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like > > she > > > > has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For > the > > > > first time thinks, no. > > > > Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs > > > > everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. > > > > Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he > > > > planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on > > > time. > > > What is a boon? > > a benefit – in my case, money > You asked: > "Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the > irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs?" > My answer is a definite "no". Maybe woman could explain to husband that > seeing as she has no say over the money he brings home, he will be having no > say over the money she has managed to bring home. Maybe she should keep it > as emergency get-away money. Maybe she should let him know that she is > thinking of leaving because she feels uncared for.

Yep.  Done that already.

Response:

>Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like she >has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the >first time thinks, no. >Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs >everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. >Husband, of course, is furious.

If the wife gives the money over to this guy to blow, she’s a fool.  Spend the money where it’s needed.  If bills need to be paid,  SHE can use the money to pay them.  He has already demonstrated that he is not dependable when it comes to getting the bills paid. The kids come first here…….do what benefits them, put the rest in a savings account for the *next* time he spends it all on his "needs". Bev Remove the "SpamFree" for email, please.  

Response:

Lisa <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote:

:> :> :> Woman gets job. : Germany takes 50% of woman’s income plus raises taxes on hubby’s. : Woman would pay most of remaining income hiring child care. : Woman has already considered this. Still I think for woman to get a job is good option. Financial independence sometimes is not being brought on a silver plater. What matters is not how much she will actually contribute but that she will have a saying –  now her husband is used to think "I’m a sole earner, I should be the one to make decissions". When she starts working, this will change. Timo — Chamber-pot is spamtrap. Contact me tiwoll at gmx dot net.

Response:

Doug Anderson <ethelthe…@yahoo.com> wrote:

: Failing that:  woman leaves this sorry-assed man and moves back to : some civilized country. Pot, kettle, black. Timo — Chamber-pot is spamtrap. Contact me tiwoll at gmx dot net.

Response:

Lisa <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote:

: If I got a job the taxes would be heavier and my minimum wage job (because : that’s all I’d be able to get with the skills I have now) would be largely : eaten up by it. : What I didn’t lose in taxes would be paid back out in child care. Maybe you have gotten your goals wrong? You think about job only as a source of income, and you may be right about being able to get only a minimum wage job. I’m familiar with German tax legislation, and you are right, it will not be of much benefit to take any job just to have a job. Haven’t you considered to learn some new profession? AFAIK Germany has very good education programs for adults, why don’t you chek what’s available? Timo — Chamber-pot is spamtrap. Contact me tiwoll at gmx dot net.

Response:

<p…@chamber.lv> wrote in message

news:af70qg$btnk7$1@ID-94041.news.dfncis.de… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Lisa <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote: > : If I got a job the taxes would be heavier and my minimum wage job (because > : that’s all I’d be able to get with the skills I have now) would be largely > : eaten up by it. > : What I didn’t lose in taxes would be paid back out in child care. > Maybe you have gotten your goals wrong? You think about job only as a source > of income, and you may be right about being able to get only a minimum > wage job. I’m familiar with German tax legislation, and you are right, it > will not be of much benefit to take any job just to have a job. > Haven’t you considered to learn some new profession? AFAIK Germany has > very good education programs for adults, why don’t you chek what’s

available? That’s a good idea.  Just don’t know where to start.  A suggestion to point me in the right direction? Volkshochschule?

Response:

Maybe the woman should move on with *her* life and stop worrying about what the man will do. JWB "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message

news:af68qa$nqg$01$1@news.t-online.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Just to be fair, I want to consult differing viewpoints.  I know this looks > like a gimme, but I have no support group and when pressed it becomes > difficult to see the wise way to do a thing. > A story. > Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. > Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. > Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to watch > children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years.  Getting real > tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. > Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is right. > Money is never there.  Time is never right.  Everything else husband thinks > is important comes first (i.e. Man makes plans to get more expensive car). > Wife has no money, no say in financial matters.  Because she doesn’t earn, > best she can do is tell when she’s upset or give advice when its asked for. > Husband is irked at woman resenting him trying to live beyond his means. > Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like she > has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the > first time thinks, no. > Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs > everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. > Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he > planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on time. > To hurt the wife once he hears her decision, he tells her he loves her but > resents children. > Wife says, I never made it a secret I had these children.  If you didn’t > want them, you should’ve thought about this before you asked me into your > life.  You should have protested long before now.  We are, unfortunately for > you, a package deal.  But not one you have to suffer with if you don’t want. > Say the word and I’ll take my children and go somewhere where we won’t be a > problem for you any longer.  Then you can spend *all* the money on yourself > and continue to not pay your bills and no one will mind or say a word. > Husband says he doesn’t want woman to leave, but continues to resent the > children. > Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the > irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs? > Inner argument #1:  The husband is the sole provider for this family, and > because the wife isn’t contributing financially, it would only be fair to > let the husband take the money and pay off bills.  Regardless who made them, > it would benefit the family to have them paid. > Inner argument #2:  The husband has consistently told white lies to the wife > about needs being taken care of, then not doing it when the time came.

Response:

"FranL" <franl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:MPG.1780e25041239584989e71@news.md.comcast.giganews.com… > In article <af68qa$nqg$0…@news.t-online.com>, > Lisaster…@blerg.com says… > > Say the word and I’ll take my children and go somewhere where we won’t be a > > problem for you any longer. > "Say the word?"  Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to woman as > well as to children if woman regained control of her own > life?

(*Disclaimer:  Keeping in mind I know this poster isn’t suggesting I do the following things.) Don’t get me wrong, I’m not ready to divorce this man and I’m not looking for encouragement to do so.  I’m not ready to become super-feminist either. Before meeting him, I’d been the the sole wage earner and had responsibility for bills most of my life and I know how difficult it is.  Truthfully, it’s been an enjoyable three years to get to lay back and let someone else lead for a change. I had no good role models for marriage and he’s been alone all his life, so for us both it’s a learning experience and still very new.  I’m not chained to the stove and he’s not beating the children. Him being resentful of the kids was bad news but understandable.  For a bachelor, having a ready made family drop in your lap is a huge change.  I think he let love cloud his vision and convinced himself none of that was going to matter.  If he weren’t feeling the way he is I’d think him a moron. My children can be a challenge even for me sometimes.  It’s if he *stays* feeling that way, doesn’t discuss ways to alleviate these feelings…then we have a major problem. I just wanted some opinion on whether its more fair for me to keep this money and spend it on our smaller but necessary needs, or let him have it to spend on the bigger bills.  That’s all.  I want to do the right thing for all of us.  I’m even pretty sure what the right thing is.  But I’m not all-seeing and knowing so I thought I’d give it a go here and see if I’m leaning in the right direction. What I’m getting so far is, (excuse the slang) them what wants control accepts responsibility.  If I want more control of the money, I need to get out and earn some.  I think that’s fair. He’s not doing his best and needs to learn to tuck it back.  I knew that already too.  Now I have to find a way to convince him of the fact.  I know it’s hard when you’re out there working and sacrificing your time not to want rewards every now and then.  Now he’s got a family and his hard work is being put toward a woman he loves, but also two children he didn’t father. And children eat money like Sugar Pops. So the task is:  find a way to keep the bills in line, find a way dad can feel appreciated and rewarded for his hard work, take care of the children, help mom find more faith in dad to pay the bills or get out there and start helping him do it

Response:

"Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message

news:af68qa$nqg$01$1@news.t-online.com… > Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like she > has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the > first time thinks, no. > Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs > everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. > Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he > planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on

time. What is a boon? Amy

Response:

"Doug Anderson" <ethelthe…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:kg3cvdywmo.fsf@noether.uoregon.edu… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> writes: > > "Nella" <rr7…@dragonbbs.com> wrote in message > > news:uhdcec3ooeah95@corp.supernews.com… > > > > A story. > > > > Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. > > > > Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. > > > > Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to > > watch > > > > children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years. Getting > > > real > > > > tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. > > > > Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is > > right. > > > Woman gets job. > > Germany takes 50% of woman’s income plus raises taxes on hubby’s. > > Woman would pay most of remaining income hiring child care. > > Woman has already considered this. > Is that really the way they tax it (50% of the _woman’s_ income)? > Or is the tax figured on the couple and it ends up that way.

Currently my husband pays around 45%.  It has nothing to do with gender. > ‘Cause I’d say the same as Nella, and then you and hubby share the tax burden > equally.  Similar question, but about the family and psychology > instead of about german tax law:  why does the woman pay _all_ the > child-care instead of half of it?

We never discussed that I would be paying all the child care.  It’s not a law for the woman to pay it all.  But after we lumped our money together in the end, whats left over from mine may as well be non-existent because of the childcare bill. I’m no tax expert but here’s what I know from what I’ve been told. Single earners with children aren’t taxed as heavily as double earners w/kids. There is a kind of social health insurance here everyone pays into so we can go to doctor anytime without hassle, but the taxes are much higher than in the states.  Last time I asked my husband he said he was paying about 45% of what he earned in taxes.  And this was one of the lowest amounts because he has us. If I got a job the taxes would be heavier and my minimum wage job (because that’s all I’d be able to get with the skills I have now) would be largely eaten up by it. What I didn’t lose in taxes would be paid back out in child care. We’ve sat down before and looked at the figures on this.  The only sane way for us to get ahead by me getting a job is if I can make considerably more than minimum wage.  When I got here the unemployment rate was around 12%. It’s now down to 9%. What I found out when I looked around, researched and talked to others was, it’s extremely difficult for a foreign person to get a job that a German national could do.  What betters your chances is to be able to provide a service that a German citizen couldn’t easily do.  My skills currently don’t involve something that specialized. NOT that I haven’t thought about this… and thought about it… and thought about it. I still consider it an option.  And if I could be sure I’d get ahead by doing it and was offered a position, I’d be all over it. > Failing that:  woman leaves this sorry-assed man and moves back to > some civilized country.

*LOL*  :) Oh that sounds so good in theory. Here’s what’s holding me back from it. This would be my second divorce…  I’d be a fallen woman, go back to my homeland to live briefly but very shamefully in a homeless shelter, get put in public housing and receive food stamps before I could get back on my feet…which I’m thinking would take anywhere from 1-5 years. A 34 yr. old poverty stricken divorcee with two children who have to suffer through it with me.  Not a comforting prospect.  Call me cowardly for not leaping forth and embracing the thought with a smile. But thank you… and Hi.  I’m getting all the posts again it seems.

Response:

"Amy Lou" <amylou…@bigpond.com> wrote in message

news:MCzR8.19766$Hj3.62197@newsfeeds.bigpond.com… > "Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> wrote in message > news:af68qa$nqg$01$1@news.t-online.com… > > Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like she > > has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the > > first time thinks, no. > > Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs > > everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. > > Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he > > planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on > time. > What is a boon?

a benefit – in my case, money

Response:

Lisa wrote: > Just to be fair, I want to consult differing viewpoints.  I know this looks > like a gimme, but I have no support group and when pressed it becomes > difficult to see the wise way to do a thing. <snip>

Just heard an interesting thing on Public radio about behavior/spending habits.  There was a money and behavior expert named Ruth Hayden on a show called "Sound Money". She’s written a couple of books on the subject.  Here’s a link where you can listen to the program: http://www.soundmoney.org/  (June 22nd). It seems to me that this will be a ongoing issue between them whether or not she gets a job and that they need to figure out how to change his behavior with respect to money. Ruth Hayden even had a name for his type but I can’t remember what it is. She made it seem entirely possible for a person to change once they recognize how their behavior has prevented them from reaching financial goals. As for resenting her children, well, that alone might be reason enough for ending the marriage. But if the only reason he resents them is because of the added financial burden, then maybe it’ll be a non issue if he can deal with the other stuff. Even if she can’t get him to read one of the books, maybe at least she’ll have a better idea of what she’s dealing with and why he is the way he is. Good Luck!

Response:

"TommyJ" <tommyj232…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:3D16D6A6.9010603@yahoo.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Lisa wrote: > > Just to be fair, I want to consult differing viewpoints.  I know this looks > > like a gimme, but I have no support group and when pressed it becomes > > difficult to see the wise way to do a thing. > <snip> > Just heard an interesting thing on Public radio about behavior/spending > habits.  There was a money and behavior expert named Ruth Hayden on a > show called "Sound Money". She’s written a couple of books on the > subject.  Here’s a link where you can listen to the program: > http://www.soundmoney.org/  (June 22nd). > It seems to me that this will be a ongoing issue between them whether or > not she gets a job and that they need to figure out how to change his > behavior with respect to money. Ruth Hayden even had a name for his type > but I can’t remember what it is. She made it seem entirely possible for > a person to change once they recognize how their behavior has prevented > them from reaching financial goals. > As for resenting her children, well, that alone might be reason enough > for ending the marriage. But if the only reason he resents them is > because of the added financial burden, then maybe it’ll be a non issue > if he can deal with the other stuff. > Even if she can’t get him to read one of the books, maybe at least > she’ll have a better idea of what she’s dealing with and why he is the > way he is. > Good Luck!

Thanks!  :) I’ll give it a listen.

Response:

> A story. > Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. > Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. > Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to watch > children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years.  Getting real > tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. > Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is right.

Woman gets job. Nella

Response:

"Nella" <rr7…@dragonbbs.com> wrote in message

news:uhdcec3ooeah95@corp.supernews.com… > > A story. > > Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. > > Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. > > Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to watch > > children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years.  Getting > real > > tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. > > Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is right. > Woman gets job.

Germany takes 50% of woman’s income plus raises taxes on hubby’s. Woman would pay most of remaining income hiring child care. Woman has already considered this.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"Lisa" <Lisaster…@blerg.com> writes: > "Nella" <rr7…@dragonbbs.com> wrote in message > news:uhdcec3ooeah95@corp.supernews.com… > > > A story. > > > Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. > > > Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. > > > Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to > watch > > > children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years.  Getting > > real > > > tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. > > > Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is > right. > > Woman gets job. > Germany takes 50% of woman’s income plus raises taxes on hubby’s. > Woman would pay most of remaining income hiring child care. > Woman has already considered this.

Is that really the way they tax it (50% of the _woman’s_ income)?  Or is the tax figured on the couple and it ends up that way.  ’Cause I’d say the same as Nella, and then you and hubby share the tax burden equally.  Similar question, but about the family and psychology instead of about german tax law:  why does the woman pay _all_ the child-care instead of half of it? Failing that:  woman leaves this sorry-assed man and moves back to some civilized country.         Doug

Response:

Just to be fair, I want to consult differing viewpoints.  I know this looks like a gimme, but I have no support group and when pressed it becomes difficult to see the wise way to do a thing. A story. Man marries woman with two children.  Wants woman to stay at home. Man makes good money but consistently spends more than he earns. Wife and children don’t go without essentials, but it hurts wife to watch children walk around in ragbag clothing for about three years.  Getting real tired of this, she asks for the situation to be corrected many times. Always told, wait until the money is there, wait until the time is right. Money is never there.  Time is never right.  Everything else husband thinks is important comes first (i.e. Man makes plans to get more expensive car). Wife has no money, no say in financial matters.  Because she doesn’t earn, best she can do is tell when she’s upset or give advice when its asked for. Husband is irked at woman resenting him trying to live beyond his means. Wife gets a boon.  At first thinks of handing it over to the man like she has given away most of what was good in her life, ALL her life.  For the first time thinks, no. Spend it where its needed.  The family can benefit most.  Small needs everywhere.  Not luxuries, real needs. Husband, of course, is furious.  When he knew the money was coming he planned it for one of the many bills he ran up and chose not to pay on time. To hurt the wife once he hears her decision, he tells her he loves her but resents children. Wife says, I never made it a secret I had these children.  If you didn’t want them, you should’ve thought about this before you asked me into your life.  You should have protested long before now.  We are, unfortunately for you, a package deal.  But not one you have to suffer with if you don’t want. Say the word and I’ll take my children and go somewhere where we won’t be a problem for you any longer.  Then you can spend *all* the money on yourself and continue to not pay your bills and no one will mind or say a word. Husband says he doesn’t want woman to leave, but continues to resent the children. Does anyone out there think woman should hand the money over to the irresponsible husband and continue to do without the needs? Inner argument #1:  The husband is the sole provider for this family, and because the wife isn’t contributing financially, it would only be fair to let the husband take the money and pay off bills.  Regardless who made them, it would benefit the family to have them paid. Inner argument #2:  The husband has consistently told white lies to the wife about needs being taken care of, then not doing it when the time came.

Response:

Filed under: Feminist

Related Posts

• TRADES & WANTS......................
• Dinner Party Needlework Project
• Province VII Gathering
• Clueless in Seattle
• Okay, I'm going to stop hating women!
• Stigma of crafts - male view
• afraid to eat
• Mini Rant
• an ode to dads (resent)
• The BIG Thread (was: Re: The Pagan Way)