SusanofO
Posts: 5672
Joined: 12/19/2005 Status: offline
|
Good point, TemptingNviceSub. IMO, unless a Dominant (or whoever of the two is making these decisions) can absolutely guarantee the relationship either isn't going to end unless either party dies, and is also more the more capable of the two of making provisions for the other party's long-term financial security, then they shouldn't be messing around with it, or be given access to meddling with their long-term financial security. But that is me speaking about how I feel. I really do think people should do what they want (I do). If it makes someone feel more "submissive" to give over complete control of all finances, then they should do that. They should also not bitch, moan and whine if, in ten years, say, they are released, and no nest-egg exists for them, for example. I am not saying people screw with other's finances behind their backs as a matter of course. I am saying it's definitely possible, and if a person you give over complete financial control to is also unwilling to answer any questions you have about how it's all going (and maybe even if they are, presuming they have "complete financial control" in the realtionship), you can get screwed over and left with little recourse, less so maybe, if you are married. Even if you have "input" into financial decisions now, if you are in a position where you have declared you are "no limits", then presumably, that could (gradually or quickly) change and there is nothing you could do about it (except walk away with your empty pockets, possibly). I am assuming some can say "that would never happen to me." Well. How do you really know that? I don't know that (reason for my opinion). - Susan
< Message edited by SusanofO -- 2/27/2007 9:32:08 PM >
_____________________________
"Hope is the thing with feathers, That perches in the soul, And sings the tune without the words, And never stops at all". - Emily Dickinson
|