On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 18:41:05 -0000, Janet > wrote:

>In article >,
says...
>>
>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 23:32:56 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 7/1/2016 09:20 Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 1/6/2016 9:38 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> We are retired now and enjoy each others' company. In the past his work
>> >>> often took him away from home and eventually I retired a bit early to
>> >>> travel with him. Now we are both retired we appreciate the time we
>> >>> have together and we make the most of it Oh and just so you know, our
>> >>> money (pensions, savings et al) we have combined. We have no 'his and
>> >>> hers' money! We have 'our' money!!!
>> >>
>> >> Good for you. My wife has not worked for years, but it has always been
>> >> "our" money. She now has Social Security income but does not bother
>> >> with it as she prefers not to have to worry about it. She has a little
>> >> cash and her own credit card. When we go out, she pays for nothing. She
>> >> is happy and wants for nothing.
>> >
>> >The perfect pet.
>>
>> Not at all, I see it as two couples who are happily living together
>> the way in which they want. Whats the matter, not working for you?
>
> I have seen the wretched consequences faced by totally dependent
>spouses, when the one who managed/ran everything dies first, leaving the
>other not just grieving, but facing the extra burden of unfamiliar
>responsibilities and tasks they've never done for themselves.
>

Back many years ago, that was so but I don't think such is the case in
years. I can remember women older than I who didn't know even what
their husband earned per pay cheque, who didn't drive (another control
habit) who hadn't a clue how to write a cheque, but they are all long
gone now.

If David were here and wanted to pay the bills and organise all things
financial, like Confucius said to do about rape, I'd just lie back and
enjoy it!