ChroniquesDuVasteMonde: Mr. Mary, suppose I have a first date in the restaurant. What to do when it comes to paying - waiting or addressing?
MICHAEL MARY: Restraint is unnecessary. Just ask the question: "How do we do it with the payment?" And if you already know that you want to invite the others, just suggest it too. Then you can see how the other reacts.

Everyone has a different attitude to money

But in such moments, there are sometimes bad surprises ...
Sure, if the other wants to divide the bill half-half, for example, but has eaten twice as much (laughs). But that's definitely not a reason not to meet again. Suffice it to note that the other one seems to have something that I would call a sting problem - and that this issue is likely to be incorporated into a relationship. So you become sensitive to the meaning of money for the other. And that's very important to me.

Can a penny pincher and a spendthrift really lead a happy relationship?
Why not. Money styles are very different. And relationships are never about dissolving differences, but about differences? which always exist? deal with it. Repositioning others does not work in everyday life, in bed or in the money.

Why do couples still argue so much about financial matters?
Because the openness is missing. In the infatuation phase, many hardly talk about money. One remains with all questions in the approximate. At some point, the partners sit stunned and say sentences like "I thought that was a gift". Or "It was clear that you participate in the purchase." Those who find themselves in such situations have spoken too little or too unclearly about money.

Money is a taboo in love?
We just do not know how to talk about it. Try it: If you just talk about "the money" and "love", everything gets mixed up and gets spongy. Then you say things like, who loves, must give? or "money must not matter", but also "a bit of negotiation is important". No one knows where to start. That's why you prefer to stay silent.

Those who do not accept that relationships are complex today can not communicate well.

How can we make sense of money issues?
The first step is to realize that relationships are complex today. So, in my books, I've introduced a tripartite division to differentiate levels of attachment in love: apart from the emotional-passionate level of desire and intimacy, there's always a friendly on which you support each other. And a partnership? always when it comes to joint projects or family. When I started thinking about money, it quickly became clear that these three levels also exist in finance.

You have to explain that ...
There is "hot" love money, that is given and given by heart. With "warm" friend money you can support the other, for example on a journey. And then there is "cool" partner money? which is brought into joint projects, houses, family (see below).

Sounds complicated.
Those who do not accept that relationships are complex today can not communicate well. It's a bit like love was one room only a hundred years ago - today it's a house with three floors. The conflict is inevitable if you can not even differentiate the floors. You never know where it is burning, where to extinguish it. The levels are an orientation. For example, with regard to monetary issues, one can always ask the question: at which level of relationship do we speak here? What is the money meant to be? as a gift, as participation, as recognition for work done?

The three levels should not be mixed together ...

The first controversy about finances often occurs in a larger joint issue, such as a vacation. How can the three levels help?
If both want to go away, but one does not have money, it would be conceivable that the wealthier partner invites the other. At this point, the question is already asked: At what level of relationship do we talk? Is it money given out of passionate love, a gift? This hot money "evaporated" immediately, it's gone. That one should want and enjoy? or prefer not to make such an invitation. The money can also be meant on the friendly level: one wants that the other one can also go on vacation. Then you can share it with your own money? and give it a part or interpret it.It may also be that one of the partners says, "Okay, I'll pay the holiday, then you could paint our apartment." In that case it would be "partner money". Interesting: All three levels are okay, all three agreements too? when it is clear what is meant, and both agree.

If a new partner says to me, "I pay our holidays, if you work for it," that would be a reason for separation ...
Maybe, but he also worked for the money. Every couple has to decide that individually. Okay is in monetary terms, which is fine for both. Damage to the relationship occurs only when someone unconsciously mixes the layers and makes "weird" offers. When a wealthy man first says, "I'll give you this holiday from my heart," and in the next argument, says, "But I paid for the holiday too, and now I want something back." Here arises injury: For at first something seems to have happened out of unconditional love? and that will be withdrawn. Then it gets ugly.

Even if you communicate clearly: there are always potential casualties in monetary matters ...
That's true. Anyone who talks about money also reveals something about the relationship to which he is ready. Incidentally, that's the second reason why people are shy about talking about money. It quickly becomes apparent if the other wants to be connected to one on all three levels of attachment. I'm thinking of a couple from my practice who wanted to contract. The woman earned much more than her partner and looked for both a large, expensive apartment - but wanted that exactly half-a-half is paid. The man could not afford this rent and would rather have stayed smaller. The woman persisted in her position. She showed that she wanted to make a commitment neither on the friendly nor on the partnership level. The two then decided to live separately. That was right? they only lived out the emotional-passionate part, where they matched well.

Many women still demand too little

Is it true that there is more dispute over money when a couple enters the family phase?
Strife is not necessary, but cool negotiation is important in the phase. It is about the question of who stays with the child, who is back with the career, how these family times are compensated financially. All this can not be clarified sufficiently, if one argues emotional-passionately or friendly, thus for example say "I like to put back in the occupation, because I love you so much". But women often do that? and fall behind.

Women whose husbands earn a lot of money, who educate children for years and who are left destitute after the divorce - what's still wrong?
Many women are unaware that they need to openly negotiate all these issues at the partnership level. They demand too little. Of course, if a woman is raising children while her husband is making a steep career, she should discuss how to divide the money he earns. She has to ask: What is your career worth over the years? A few hundred thousand? Or more? What will I get if we split up? Of course, such negotiations are difficult. Also, because you deliberately discuss the relationship from the end.

Also hard.
Yes and no. If you are aware that it can split, you are more careful about the relationship. In addition, many relationships simply are not designed to last forever.

So are relationship partners in such cases just business partners ...
No. With business partners, it does not matter who it is that makes something for me or gives me something. In fact, some couples argue in this trap. For example, if a man says, "Okay, you're taking care of the kids, you're earning as much as a nanny from me." Such an idea is absurd and hurtful. The woman would just have to say, "Well, then hire a nanny and I'll break up." I have experienced men who have turned in very quickly.

An extra power in relationships always has the one who needs a little less ...

When do you recommend contracts?
Whenever major acquisitions are needed, transparent contracts should be made. And always when it comes to sums that can not be waived with a light heart. For example, record notarially who has contributed which equity into a common house. Special marriage contracts do not have to be? and you should under no circumstances sign a marriage contract at your own disadvantage. In the US, there are some contracts that would be unthinkable for us. Since there are clauses for partners of celebrities and very wealthy that they should deliver good mood and sex for a certain money.

Let's face it, can such relationships be good?
That, too, depends on what the partners want. Also here in Germany there are not so few relationships that I would put into the category "needs-oriented exchange relations". And it is no longer just the stereotype of the rich old man who marries a young woman. Even influential women get together with good-looking younger men.These relationships are often pretty tough because they are clear? and the partners need to solve little emotional conflicts.

And yet there is the saying "Whoever has the money has the power". Is he in relationships?
No, not at all. If you think that, you become too dependent. Not all are impressed by a lot of money or value it. An extra power in relationships always has the one who needs a little less? be it money or love.

WHO PAYS WHEN WHAT?

The fact that money issues often develop explosive power is mainly due to the fact that we mix the various levels that are possible in relationships too much. Here is an emergency cheat sheet for the next dispute:

What kind of money is this about? Is it hot, warm or cool money?

1. Hot money. The emotional-passionate level of a relationship is about sex, romantic love, being in love. Whenever you unconditionally give money to show that love to someone, the money is "hot." It fizzles, there is no return for it.

EXAMPLE: small and expensive gifts, traveling together, gifts of money.

2. Warm money. At the friendly level of a relationship, we want to help others to realize their own desires and let them share in our lives. So you give warm money to support the partner or let him (if you live in prosperity) participate in your own money.

EXAMPLE: The partner wants to study or sabbatical, this is at the expense of the family income. Or: invite the others to travel or to the restaurant.

3. Cool money. At the partnership level, the partners build something together and pull together. It can be a joint company, a project, a purchase like a real estate. In this area, even among partners, the money is "cool". This means that negotiations have to be negotiated!

EXAMPLE: Family formation, family-occupation sharing, real estate and loans, joint ventures.

Now Available Here: The ChroniquesDuVasteMonde Finance Special!

Also read

Now at the kiosk and in the shop: The ChroniquesDuVasteMonde Finance Special!

Things You Should Never Say About Money In A Relationship | The Financial Diet (April 2024).