Search results

I'm just saying you can interpret it both ways. You are giving up 50% control of your funds and taking over 50% of theirs (and vice versa) under a pooled income agreement. So while you could say this arrangment is for people who 'lack trust' it could just as equally said that it's for people...

Hmmm... however when you have shared funds you are 50% in control of your partners income. I would have thought the '100% shared option' is for those who want control over the others expenditure and lack trust in their ability to spend their money.

I'm single right now. I've lived with a girl and supported her in the past, but we had no formal agreement. I thought about the arrangement by having a shared account where a portion of each partners income is deposited. Something like 70% into the shared account and 30% into an individual...

Kinda off track, but still an interesting viewpoint on men, women and money. http://menforjustice.net/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=49 * Note - the information contained within does not represent the views of the poster!