YOUR MONEY-How couples sabotage their finances - Reuters UK
(The author is a Reuters contributor. The opinions expressed are his own. This is part of a five-story package on marriage and money moving June 4-7)
By Chris Taylor
NEW YORK, June 6 (Reuters) - With a wedding coming up, you'd think Jay Buerck would be obsessing about the usual details: Writing vows, choosing appetizers, or figuring out seating charts to accommodate challenging relatives.
But what worries the 29-year-old St. Louis marketing professional isn't any of those things: It's money.
Not that he and his bride-to-be Liz Downey won't have enough; they earn comfortable salaries. What really freaks him out is the inherent challenge of joining two people's finances.
"Money is the reason why many people get divorced," says Buerck. "I have a buddy who got married and didn't tell his wife about the extent of his debt, and they had a rough go of it when he came clean. That's something I want to try and avoid."
The couple has already taken steps to prepare their finances. That's a smart strategy, according to financial experts, especially now that U.S. couples are waiting longer to marry, and many people have thousands of dollars in student loans and credit card debt by the time they take their vows.
Money causes more arguments than other typical flashpoints, according to a recent survey by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and Harris Interactive.
A full 27 percent of respondents said their spats started over money, more than problems with kids (16 percent) or chores (13 percent).
Couples who lock horns over finances at least once a week are 30 percent more likely to get divorced, according to a 2009 study by researchers at Utah State University,
"I probably spend 15 percent of my time with couples actually talking about money, and the other 85 percent talking about personal issues," says Chris Kimball, a certified financial planner in Lakewood, Washington, who also has a Masters of Divinity degree.
"It all ties into money. It's a very powerful thing that can do great things in people's lives, or can really mess them up."
Shockingly, nearly one-half of all people have lied to their significant other about money, according to an April poll by Self Magazine and Today.com. (For a graphic representation of our financial State of the Union, click (link.reuters.com/zyw58s)
And a survey conducted this spring by CreditCards.com revealed that 6 million Americans have hidden financial accounts from their spouses or live-in partners.
The deception isn't usually malicious. Often it's prompted by guilt and embarrassment about spending. Compounding the problem is that financial behavior is very deeply set, and can't be altered easily.
So where do couples go wrong, when it comes to money -- and how can they make it right?
HAVE THE MONEY TALK
Only 43 percent of couples talked about money before marriage, according to a May 2010 survey conducted for American Express.
But lack of disclosure about your financial issues -- maybe you're struggling with $100,000 in student debt, or maybe you filed for bankruptcy at some point -- isn't really any different from lying. Be up front about your financial situation, have the "money talk" long before the big day, and tackle any challenges as a couple.
"My significant other didn't tell me about the money problems we were having, and then one day we had no credit left and had lost pretty much everything," says Holli Rovenger, an author and speaker in Greenville, South Carolina. "If we'd worked together, maybe our finances wouldn't have spiraled out of control."
Minor money differences can be overcome as long as you have the basics covered: You have your daily needs met, you're bringing in more than you're paying out, and you're able to build a nest egg for the future. But once overspending and debt enter the picture, all bets are off.
"I was always a black-belt shopper, and hated to miss a sale," says Jenny Triplett, an entrepreneur in Powder Springs, Georgia, who's been married to husband Rufus Triplett for 22 years. "I'd have bags full of new clothes in the closet, and only bring them out one piece at a time. But eventually we came to a compromise, and I got my spending under control."
That's exactly the right template for resolving money disputes, planners advise. Even with differing money styles, if both partners take strides toward the middle and agree on broad outlines of a budget, it could prevent countless disputes.
HIDING FROM HELP
Money is such an emotional issue that it could be difficult for couples to untangle all the knots on their own. A trained third party can help you figure out the core issues, and mutually agree on a financial plan.
"I've had clients yelling at each other in the parking lot, who came into the conference room and then wouldn't say a word to each other for the first hour," says Kimball. "But eventually we were able to work through it. Talking to someone can help air these financial issues in a safe environment."
Check out the website of the Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education (www.afcpe.org), which has a searchable database of trained financial counselors.
BEING ON SAME PAGE
It's helpful to have basic guidelines in place that will keep you on the same page. For instance, purchases under a certain dollar amount can be left to each spouse's discretion, while larger ones should to be cleared with your partner.
Some couples might be comfortable pooling all of their money, and others may not; neither is the "right" choice, but that should be decided explicitly.
"Understanding your partner's values on money is so very important," says Andi Wrenn, a financial counselor in Boston with a master's in marriage and family therapy. "Talk about how they learned money management, and what they plan to do in the future with the money they have and earn. Not often do people marry that are from exactly the same background."
That certainly applies to Jay Buerck and his bride-to-be. She's traditionally been more of a budgeter, and he's more laissez faire when it comes to counting pennies. But since they set up a joint account and moved in together, finances have "actually become less stressful," he says. "It's all about being open and honest." (Follow us @ReutersMoney or here; editing by Jilian Mincer, Linda Stern and Jeffrey Benkoe)
MONEY MARKETS-Key dollar rate dips on stimulus hopes - Reuters
Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency, providing investing news, world news, business news, technology news, headline news, small business news, news alerts, personal finance, stock market, and mutual funds information available on Reuters.com, video, mobile, and interactive television platforms. Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
NYSE and AMEX quotes delayed by at least 20 minutes. Nasdaq delayed by at least 15 minutes. For a complete list of exchanges and delays, please click here.
Celebrating Victory Today, But Big Money Is the Big Winner - DAILY KOS
While celebrating the big victory, I keep in mind the defeats and what they mean, not just for our state, but for our country:
Big Money, Republican leaning Corporate Media, saturated RW hate radio and Faux Newzzzz have kept a lying, corrupt, extremist governor in office against the largest state-wide grassroots movement I've ever seen or read about.If this power combination can save someone as toxic as Scott Walker, every election in this country is vulnerable. Big Money will just roll in, local and statewide corporate media will pander to the Republicans and attack the Democrats, and hate radio with Faux Newzzz will just hammer away at the rest. If I was President Obama, I'd be very, very worried (and perhaps more than a bit regretful that I didn't step in to defend the principle of recalls and campaign for Tom Barrett) because they'll use this same strategy to go after him.
The Republican wins yesterday are very troublesome because they overcame a massive grassroots movement. This was a test of our very concept of democracy - that People Power could overcome Money Power. Money Power won.
It wasn't Money Power alone that won. Money Power was also helped by their previous establishment of a corporatized media with media monopolies once again permitted by the relaxation, lack of enforcement, or elimination of regulations that prevented it in the past. Our leaders either ignored history or failed to remember that history repeats itself unless we prevent it from doing so.
William Randolph Hearst, media mogul and RWNJ (do those 2 always go hand in hand?) controlled a vast media empire in a time when print media was the only game in town and radio was in its infancy. As a result, he had a massive political influence that went well beyond what it should. Rules were established to prevent another media monopoly after his collapsed due to his greed to own it all sent his empire into financial ruin. Had he been less grasping to buy every newspaper in sight, that empire might still exist today weilding enormous influence.
Instead, lack of enforcement and deregulation have allowed modern day RWNJ and media mogul Rupert Murdock to emerge. And Clear Channel with its vast holdings throughout the country continues to expand the reach of RW hate radio with a few progressive stations sprinkled in here and there for "balance".
Corporations, no longer happy just to buy favorable coverage (or at least prevent negative coverage) with advertising dollars (do they really expect you to buy one of those wind turbines, jumbo jets, or jet engines they advertise?) have now become media owners themselves. Don't expect to see stories on how many Fortune 500 companies pay ZERO taxes or how their armies of lobbyists keep people paying more so they can pay less. And don't expect to see any positive coverage of politicians who don't serve their interests.
Big Money didn't do it on its own yesterday. Big Money has also patiently created Corporate Media over the decades. The team of Big Money and Corporate Media won. Our corporate media in Wisconsin has ensured that most people in Wisconsin hadn't even heard about the John Doe or Scott Walkers criminal defense fund, that acted like stenographers for Scott Walker "It's Working" talking points, that failed to point out he's the first governor in history to keep a secret schedule, that accepted and printed Scott Walkers Miracle Math jobs numbers while denouncing the actual Bureau of Labor Statistics report, that promoted Scott Walkers We Have More Teachers Miracle Math Report (yes, we have more teachers if you just ignore the numbers of retirements, layoffs, and resignations, but count replacement teachers as new, additional teachers), and so much other phony claptrap they pass off as "news".
Not just print media, but electronic media is equally at fault. Celebrity gossip, sensationalized stories, and propaganda are all you get. Whether on the radio, television, or newspaper it's becoming all Pravda all the time. Climate change is debatable (stop believing your own lying eyes), "clean coal" is good, the oil companies always clean up after a major spill, the uber rich are "job creators", regulations are bad, taxes are bad, and, my favorite, work hard and save and you, too, will be "prosperous".
And then there's the RW hate radio that saturates every inch of this country and Faux Newzzz available on basic cable everywhere to gin up every wingnut within earshot with an endless parade of sensationalized stories and ideological memes.
A healthy, vibrant, truth-reporting media is vital to a democracy. So vital that Freedom of the Press is enshrined in our Constitution. If it no longer exists because it's been bought, can democracy survive?
I'm concerned about what the future will mean if this combination can save someone like Scott Walker.
No comments:
Post a Comment