TresSugar

Handle This: She’s Cheap, But Rich

DearSugar — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:00:00 -0700

Though you have quite a few thrifty friends who you’re always more than happy to oblige by grabbing deli sandwiches over a dinner out, or a long walk instead of a trip to the movie theater, one friend in particular is notoriously stingy with her dollars. She constantly complains about being broke. In fact, half the time you end up paying the way for both of you and don’t see a dime in return.

When using her computer, you get a brief glimpse of her bank statement open on her screen. In her checking account alone she has three times as much money as you do. You’re totally shocked and can’t help but feel taken advantage of - she's been lying to you. Money is always awkward, so how would you handle this?

Source

You Asked: Why Won't He Move in With Me?

DearSugar — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:00:00 -0700

Dear Sugar,

I have been dating my boyfriend for just over two years now and we live just a few blocks away from each other. I live with my 5-year-old daughter, and he lives with his younger brother. My daughter adores him, and he just loves her. Last year I asked him to move in with us but he said he wasn't ready. This year I have asked him three times, and he still says that he's still not ready. I have to move out of my apartment due to financial issues - I can only stay if I get a co-signer. I've explained the situation to him, and that I need him to move in with me, but he still won't budge.

I told him that I need him to show me that we are moving forward in our relationship, but still nothing has changed. In fact, I do everything for him. He's at my house five days a week, which is why I don't understand why he won't take this next step. Part of me thinks that he's just not willing to commit to me and that I should move on, but my other half just loves him so much and knows what a good person he is. What should I do?

- Move in Confusion Cara

To see DearSugar's answer read more.

Dear Move in Confusion Cara,

Moving in with your boyfriend due to financial necessity verses moving in with him as a step forward in your relationship are two very different things. In fact, while I understand the stress that money can have, in my opinion, economic stress is not always the greatest reason to take a step forward in a relationship - especially when your boyfriend is telling you directly that he's just not ready.

Furthermore, you don't want to have to depend on your boyfriend for financial security. Downgrade your apartment and see if he can watch your daughter a few hours during the week while you pick up some extra work hours. It can also be very helpful to sit down and plan a formal budget and see where you can cut expenditures.

As to why he's not ready, I can't say. I do know that many men take moving in together as an extremely serious step in a relationship, and don't want to do it lightheartedly or without a lot of thought. The good news is that your boyfriend is being honest with you, and I don't think his attitude is necessarily an indicator of not being committed. Obviously, however, this is something that's really bothering you. Ask him what he sees as the future of your relationship. Does he picture himself moving in with you eventually? When does he see that happening? Sometimes just a simple talk can do wonders.

Source

This or That: Tiny Pad or Parents' Place?

DearSugar — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:00:00 -0700

Financially speaking, times are tough for you and your fiancé. He was recently laid off and your job doesn’t pay well to begin with. Unfortunately, he’s been having a difficult time getting a new job, and now that your lease is up, you guys need to downgrade in order to make ends meet. Your apartment hunt has hit a few snags, but you desperately need to get out of your current place before drowning in credit card debt. Would it be worse if . . .

This: You get stuck with the only affordable apartment around, which is a 200-ft. studio that doesn’t even have a closet? The neighborhood is nice, but still, you'll literally be stepping all over each other.

Or…

That: You end up back in his old bedroom at his parents' house, who only asks that you’re home for dinner every night, and breakfast on Sunday mornings? It's spacious and cheap, but they're completely demanding!

Source

You Asked: He Won't Help With the Bills

DearSugar — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:00:00 -0800

Dear Sugar,

My live-in boyfriend is helpful around the house, the sweetest person on earth, and I love him so much, but he has never contributed to our household bills - it's my house. I think he has paid one phone bill and one utility bill in three and a half years. It's very uncomfortable for me and I'm starting to feel resentful. We have no communication about this, except him telling me things will get better, only after I start to complain. He even owes me money that I loaned him a few months ago. I feel like I've hit the point where I have to tell him to move. I love him but I don't know what to do. Any advice?

- He's Bleeding Me Dry Bevin

To see Dear Sugar's answer read more

Dear He's Bleeding Me Dry Bevin,

You've got to tell your boyfriend that if he doesn't start carrying some of the financial weight then he has to move out. Come up with a fair budget for the both of you and present it to him - make sure that you include a monthly payment for the amount he owes you, too. Obviously, if he can't agree to this or doesn't follow through then you have to be firm about having him move out. You can't continue to pay the way for both of you, especially since it's creating resentment.

It's not uncommon for people to go through lazy or unproductive periods, but three and a half years is unacceptable if you ask me. I would be seriously worried if your boyfriend is as unconcerned about finances as he seems to be. If you guys are planning to continue your relationship and either enter into a long-term partnership or marriage, I would think long and hard about your decision. Of course, it's okay for one person to shoulder more of the burden, but it has to be something both people have agreed upon together; otherwise, it's a recipe for disaster. Good luck.

Source

After You're Married, Do You Join Your Money?

DearSugar — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:00:00 -0800

When you get married, it can feel so amazing to be in love and start your two-person family; but, it can also bring up a lot of questions, especially about money. In my parents' generation, it was just assumed that your finances would be combined, but things are a little different now. Since so many relationships are, unfortunately, ending in divorce, people want to have separate accounts (and sometimes sign a prenup) so they're protected - just in case. Another, more positive, reason that people aren't joining accounts is because women have a more equal role when it comes to salaries, so they aren't as reliant on their husbands income.

So what do you think? After you say "I do," do you feel comfortable pooling all your money together, with the idea that "What's mine is yours, and what's yours is mine?" Or do you think it's best to keep separate bank accounts?

Source

Group Therapy: I'm More Responsible Than He Is

Wed, 26 Dec 2007 03:17:01 -0800

I have been in a great relationship for five years with a great guy; however, I am without a doubt "the responsible one." We are at the point where he will likely propose any day. This excites me and scares me at the same time. I have spent my whole life preparing for my future: college, law school, and saving financially. I have set myself up for success and made many sacrifices to get here on my own.

Now, when it comes to my significant other, the tables could not be more turned. He lost his parents at a young age and never had the opportunity to learn the importance of money or credit. His credit is terrible, he has no savings, and he just has no innate sense of planning for the future like I do. As for compatibility in all the other areas, we couldn't be more right for each other, but financially we are on different pages. We have had talks about this, and he simply has the attitude that money is just not that important to him and says that he trusts me to "handle it." I am just uncertain about how I can set us up for success while at the same time protecting my bank account. Any advice?

Source

Money and Relationships

DearSugar — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:18:46 -0700

Meeting someone and becoming a couple is a wonderful feeling. You begin sharing your time together and your love for each other, and as your relationship grows closer, you may move in together, which means sharing expenses.

Sure, it's nice when a guy asks you out on a date and offers to pay for dinner, but when it comes to being in a committed relationship, I'm a firm believer in sharing all the costs. While every couple is different, I don't think one person should be in charge of bringing home the bacon while the other one slacks at home.

So how can you make dealing with money as fair and painless as possible? Here are some tips:

No one said you had to merge all your money. And I hate to say it, but in this day and age, with so much divorce, that's just not a smart idea. But you could open a joint checking or savings accounts to pay for joint expenses such as rent, mortgage, groceries, electricity, etc. If one of you makes more money than the other, you may want to split the bills accordingly. So instead of spitting the bills 50/50, you may split them 60/40. As long as you are in agreement about your plan, that's all that matters
If you decide to go this route, you should use your personal bank account to pay for things that are solely for you like clothes, gym memberships, hair and nail appointments, gifts, etc.

Want to hear the rest? Then read more

It's not uncommon for one person be in charge of managing the finances. This person should deal with all of the paperwork, the bills, and the credit cards. (It doesn't have to be the guy. Growing up, this job was always my mother's.)
Decide what days bills are paid, the 1st, the 15th, etc. of every month. Whether one person is dealing with the bills or you're doing it together, this will ensure that it gets done on time and with no late fees.
When it comes to big purchases, like furniture, a pet, or a house, you must consult the other person before making any major decisions. Make sure to communicate openly about your wants and your concerns when it comes to spending large sums of money. This is good for your finances and for your relationship.

These are just a few tips that you may find helpful, but if you have a plan already in place that works for you, stick with it. Money problems can tear relationships apart, so just make sure you two are upfront and equally responsible when it comes to your expenses.

Source

Good Idea or Bad Idea: Fibbing About Money

DearSugar — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:30:00 -0700

I just listened to an NPR piece about money and marriage, and the ways in which couples either lie or omit details about how they spend and what they spend it on. Even when couples set aside separate funds for personal spending, it seems many people still feel defensive or uncomfortable about how they choose to use those funds.

What do you think? Is it okay to tell little white lies or medium-sized white lies about how you spend your money? Do you? Is it a good idea or a bad idea in your book?

Source

Obama Refuses Public Financing. What Does This Mean?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:37:29 -0700

I might be a special brand of crazy, but when I woke up to this news this morning, I started hyperventilating: Obama is not accepting public financing.

In shunning each tax-payer's $3 contribution we kick in when we pay our taxes, Obama is the first candidate to do so since Congress passed 1970s campaign finance laws after Watergate in the 1970s. McCain, the Republican nominee in waiting, has already taken steps to accept the public funds in the general election - matching funds that put a cap on how much each candidate can spend.

Obama said of his decision in a video released to supporters:

It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections. But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system. And we've already seen that he's not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations.

There are a million factors to consider:

Does the above statement mean he's going to police all 527s on his behalf, making sure they're silent and not "broken"?
Obama is the best fundraiser this side of an ATM - he's coaxed $265 million in donations so far. But do his supporters want him raising money? Or focusing on being the best, most prepared person for the job?
Last November he said this: “If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." Is he going back on his word, or should "publicly financed" be in quotes with a winky-face after it?
The campaigns and respective fight/momentum each has had to work with has been vastly different. Obama's been in a grudge match to the death until two weeks ago. That will inspire the wallets of supporters much more than a candidate who's been assured for months, creating an inequity that starting the general election fresh, with public-financing, would solve.

Those are just some of the thoughts that are racing through my tending toward indignant head. What do you think? Is Obama making the best, fairest decision for his own campaign? Is public financing broken like he says? Or did he just cash a blank check made payable to "The Next President of the United States"?

Source

Cashed In? Should Candidates Accept Public Financing?

CitizenSugar — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:15:07 -0700

Barack Obama and John McCain are trading pointed queries over who's spending cash from whom, and it all swirls around the question of accepting public financing.

McCain is urging Obama, the fund-raising powerhouse, to follow through on his promise and accept public campaign matching funds this fall. The funds effectively cap the amount of money a candidate can spend. McCain had already bought into the plan (receiving a $4 million bailout on his faltering campaign last year) and now might be in hot water for exceeding spending limits while still technically in the primary portion of the budgeting.

Public finance reforms aim to give voters more control over government, make politicians accountable to constituents rather than campaign contributors, and provide a level playing field. By combining both an equal amount of dough for candidates, and assuring that a certain amount of donations they do raise are small contributions from a varied audience of voters, the system hopes to give everyone a fair shot at getting elected.

Should Obama keep his promise and accept matching funds, or be the first candidate since 1976 to go private? Do the limits enhance the debate by granting greater accessibility, or limit speech by tying the hands of voters who might want to give more?

Source