I agree with @NickF @theleastofthese, he's said what I was meaning to say but hadn't got around to. Thanks for the clarification.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Shared vs separate bank accounts?
- Thread starter Sam Speaks
- Start date
This is a valid concern but I imagine one that could be worked around.
Sam Speaks
Member
"How can I provide security for myself if this marriage falls apart", you'd be far better asking "How can I ensure this marriage does not fall apart".
Spend 90% of your time trying to ensure success and 10% thinking about how to fail better and you should be good to go.
Spend 90% of your time trying to ensure success and 10% thinking about how to fail better and you should be good to go.
I guess I’m the only one who feels there shouldn’t be family funds inaccessible to the husband. While I prefer all funds going into a single account, if you’re going to do this I would recommend he be a joint member on account. There may be an emergency when he needs access to all family funds.
I think you're in the majority
Of course, it all depends how you define "inaccessible". If your wife is submissive, everything in her name is completely accessible. So you're also assuming a worst-case scenario of a rebellious wife trying to keep things from the husband, and assuming the position that the wives cannot be trusted and are inherently likely to turn against the husband and deny him access to family funds.
Are you not falling for the exact same trap that @theleastofthese was falling for, assuming the worst and planning for that, rather than planning for the best? Where she was assuming the husband would be selfish and the wife needs protection from him, you're assuming the wife will be selfish and the husband needs to be protected from her. Where is faith in either of your positions? You're both approaching marriage like it's a divorce battle before the marriage has even begun.
I don't think either of us is falling for anything; I think you're overreacting to one preference we each hold regarding one topic involving marriage.
I can't speak for @NBTX11 and even though he and I disagree, I don't necessarily think his preference gives the impression that he doesn't trust his wives or that he thinks they're selfish. Just as my preference doesn't mean that, i'm hyper-focusing on the worst and strictly planning for it.
Last edited:
I don't know how things work in the USA regarding ownership of shares in a company, so I'm asking out of pure ignorance. But how do you deal with investments such as with company shares? Do your wives not have any investments of their own? My wives each have shareholdings in their own names, as they can only be owned by one person, and are therefore inaccessible to me. But they don't buy or sell without discussing it with me first. Why would that be a problem? Shalom
I’m stating my preferences. We’ve actually had to deal with these issues when I brought Dana in. She brought in her own income and accounts. I felt it was best for me to be able to access all family income and after I explained that to her she agreed and accepted it. I don’t see that as planning for the worse or not trusting her. I just see it as wise management of the money God has blessed us with.
I think that it is possible for many of us to love our wives and still not "trust" them when it comes to finances. A wife or concubine isn't a business partner and doesn't need to be given equal access to anything.
That said, my wife doesn't work (and never has) so I can see how perspectives may change if a wife is making a substantial amount. I don't think the principle does though, the husband has control over the finances and can choose to trust one (or move) of his wives to assist him with the finances or have access, etc.
My main issue with my wife working has less to do with finances and more to do with her having a "boss" other than me.
That said, my wife doesn't work (and never has) so I can see how perspectives may change if a wife is making a substantial amount. I don't think the principle does though, the husband has control over the finances and can choose to trust one (or move) of his wives to assist him with the finances or have access, etc.
My main issue with my wife working has less to do with finances and more to do with her having a "boss" other than me.
Yes, as is happening more often than ever before, access to an account is frozen by a bank at a government's behest.
Nothing beats gold and silver buried on an island off the coast of Honduras
Absolutely. If the husband manages to get on a blacklist but the wife isn't on it, you might be very glad to have an account in her name.
Well, I was actually trying to be racist with that whole "blacklist" thing, but it was clearly too subtle. I'll accept sexist as a conciliation prize.How sexist of you!
Well, I saw the reference to "wife" here...
So I can see you are being transphobe!
Racist, sexist, and transphobe in two posts! Wahooo, quite an accomplishment, I reckon.
Last edited:
Right, I mean, how dare he exist?
The Torah has a way of ensuring that a woman does not leave empty-handed in the event of a divorce, which is the (virgin's) dowry. She could return to her father's house, who would be able to support her with that money. However, as we are not living that way (at least where I speak from), I believe that it is up to each man to decide how things will be done in his family. I personally think it's good for each person to have an account in their name, for emergencies, tax purposes, etc., but not exactly in case of divorce.