Two weeks ago, the financial planner Jeff and I had met with last year (and who sent us $20 movie gift certificates for Christmas---sweet!), sent us an email asking if we’d be willing to be interviewed for a Washington Post article about couples and money. After ascertaining that we wouldn’t need to provide any kind of specific details about our finances but would rather be asked general questions about how we handle money, we agreed and we each were interviewed by phone. The interviews took place while we were at work, and when we both got home from work, we shared what turned out to be the same reaction: We weren’t what the reporter was looking for.
Me: We’re both savers. We both believe in living within, if not below, our means.
Reporter: And you think that is both of your natural dispositions?
Me: Yes
Reporter: So you both generally agree on how to handle your money?
Me: Yes
Reporter: Oh, okay.
Me: No, not that I can recall.
Reporter: Nothing? Not even something that seems small now but was a big fight at the time.
Reporter: Oh, okay.
Me: At this point, yes.
Reporter: Is that an issue for either of you?
Me: No, the money all goes into the same pot at the end of the day.
Reporter: You don’t think he has a problem with you making more money than him?
Me: No, we’re not really into the idea of traditional gender roles. And I’m sure one day he’ll be making more money than I do.
Reporter: And that won’t bother you?
Me: No, it can only benefit both of us.
Reporter: (I think I hear a sigh.)
Me: No
Reporter: It doesn’t affect your outlook on savings at all? You won’t be tightening your belt?
Me: No, we already put a lot of our money into savings, and we’re so young that we have to look at the big picture. If we were planning to retire soon, we might be worried, but we have many, many more years before that happens.
The article was in this weekend’s paper. We’re not in it. A couple who spent $11,000 on dining out while declaring that they were trying to save money was in it. A couple who has separate checking accounts because she bounces checks and he can’t handle it was in it. A couple whose jobs depend of government contracts that might not be renewed due to the current economic situation was in it.
7 comments:
There are so many people who can't handle their finances nowadays that I'm sure you guys are probably the exception rather than the rule. The reporter was probably surprised that you had nothing juicy to give.
Someone at my work found an article on a website called Military Saves that offered the helpful hint that you can save money by "bouncing one less check every month." One less?! How about don't bounce any?
That's hilarious. With money saving tips like that, we'll all be millionaires soon.
Thersa, I am trying for the third time to post a comment. I don't know why it won't publish it.
Of course, you and Jeff are too boring for the papaer. People enjoy reading about people who are in the middle of a crisis or just plain stupid. So you will just have to be content with your boring life that I believe a lot of other people would love to have.
So it finally lets me comment and I didn't even have time to correct the spelling of your name. :(
I'm willing to wager you are going to be unpatriotic and save your stimulus check as well. Shame on you.
Am I really getting $600 dollars from the government? I'd save it for no other reason than to do the exact opposite of what Bush wants me to do.
Yes, ours will be going into savings. We will then probably spend it in a foreign country. We could pay for a good chunk of a nice little safari with $1,200 dollars. Apparently we are extremely unpatriotic, forsaking our duty to buy, buy, buy.
shame on you! don't you want to buy several cups of coffee at starbucks? or how about a new toaster- that one you got for your wedding is a few years old now, time to replace it -no?
good for you guys- you & several of our friends at home are my wonderful examples to live by.
Post a Comment