Because people change, and very few actually revisit the terms of the contract later in life, when perhaps it would be due. You are adding circumstances and assumptions to the question of joint finances when making a case for it:) But I guess so am I... I'm only pro-joint-finances if I'm okay with losing what I potentially could lose in a shtf-scenario. It's just that when someone asks if its worth it to create joint finances, my general answer is no because a shtf-scenario will most likely contain one of the following for that person:7Wannabe5 wrote:In any circumstance in which you are confident about your ability to fulfill, enforce and revisit/renegotiate contract as needed, in alignment with your own self-interest, why wouldn't you choose to profit from continuing and expanding investment in joint enterprise?
1) getting more than they deserved
2) getting less than they deserved
And most likely, you will find men asking this question because their female partner wanted joint finances, and most likely they will find themselves in 2) if shtf:) And you cannot rule out shtf-scenarios when your life is at stake like that.
I see your points though and agree with them in theory, but I still think separate finances is generally the way to go because...reality.
In any case, a deeper discussion about this becomes meaningless unless we specify exactly what the prenup/joint finances means in practice, or specify the situation more.
@saving-10-years: In the examples that comes to my mind, she ran off with either money or kids. In either case, the outcome was unfair. Of course, joint finances was worth it for her.