My husband and I opened a joint bank account years before getting married. Pooling our money made us feel like more of a team.
It was the biggest game changer in our relationship.
Now, we have a few different shared accounts for different things. Our system works for us.
My partner Sam and I had been dating for about three years when the conversation about opening a joint bank account came up. We weren't married at the time, but we had just started living together after moving to Canada for a working holiday.
Until then, we split most things evenly. Sam had always earned more money than I did, but I was determined to pay my own way. Often, he would treat me to dinner or a movie, but I tried to reciprocate as much as possible.
When we moved in together in Canada, dividing up all of our shared expenses seemed like unnecessary work. Neither of us could be bothered keeping a spreadsheet of costs or using a calculator to work out who owed what for groceries and rent.
He brought up the idea of a joint bank account
"Why don't we just open a joint bank account?" Sam said one night on the couch while playing Xbox. It wasn't the first time the topic had come up — Sam had suggested it a few months before we moved in together, and I was hesitant.
To me, the prospect of having a shared bank account sounded so weird and grown-up. I was pretty immature at 25, and back then, I thought that joint bank accounts were something that only married couples had, along with a station wagon and a mortgage.
However, the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. So, one afternoon after work, Sam and I marched down to the local Bank of Montreal branch on Banff Avenue with our IDs in hand and opened our first-ever shared bank account. I remember walking outside afterward and snapping a photo together, laughing. It was a milestone in our relationship that I'd never really thought about before that point.
Pooling our money changed our relationship
Straight away, something shifted in our relationship. It wasn't just about the convenience of having a joint account, like being able to pay bills or save money more efficiently. There was this sense that we were on the same page. We were pooling our resources, making joint financial decisions, and truly functioning as a team.
To start off, we each transferred a set amount into the shared bank account each week to go towards our living expenses and savings goals for a three-month trip around South America. Call us naive, but we didn't even set any ground rules around spending or have a conversation about what would happen if we broke up. We were in a pretty good place in our relationship at the time, and we both trusted each other to do the right thing.
A year later, when we moved from Canada to the UK, we used the same system of opening a joint account and transferring a set amount into it, then again when we returned home to Australia. It worked so well for us, and made living together, traveling, and navigating expenses a lot less complicated.
We have a system for dealing with money, and it works for us
After we got married, Sam and I did some reading about money management and decided to set up a few different accounts — one for our regular expenses, one each for our fun money (activities, meals out, entertainment, etc.), and one for our savings and investments. This financial management strategy has proven to be invaluable and has helped us to budget and live within our means.
We've now been married for over a decade, and we still use the same system. We know couples who keep their finances completely separate, and though it works for them, this is what's worked for us. We're raising a family together and working toward shared financial goals, so managing our money together just made sense to us.
Looking back, I think one of the biggest game-changers for our relationship wasn't moving in together or even getting married. Surprisingly, it was opening a shared bank account. That was the turning point — the moment we decided to work as a team toward a shared financial goal.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
"This government is anti-union and anti-worker": CUPE NS Denounces Use of Bill 107
HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, August 16, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--CUPE Nova Scotia strongly condemns the federal government's decision to interfere in workers' right to collective bargaining and job action by invoking Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. "Clearly, this government is anti-union and anti-worker," said Alan Linkletter, CUPE Nova Scotia President. "Forcing workers back on the job instead of supporting free and fair collective negotiations directly contradictions workers' rights that are guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Air Canada has asked the government to crush striking workers' Charter rights, and Federal Labour minister Patty Hajdu is ready to deliver. Hajdu announced that the federal government will be invoking Section 107 at a press conference this afternoon, citing the financial welfare of Canadians and the economy at large as a deciding factor for this decision. "She says this move is for the financial security of Canadians—are these workers not Canadians? Does their welfare not matter? How can you be financially secure when you don't even get paid for all of the hours you work?" Contrary to the Minister's remarks, this will not ensure labour peace in Canada. This will only push this fight onto the next group of workers in negotiations, while Air Canda's flight attendants continue to work for a billion-dollar company for free. Flight attendants are only paid when the plane is moving, and work as many as 35 unpaid hours a month performing vital duties that ensure the safe and smooth operation of each flight. Now, instead of paying flight attendants for all the hours they work, Air Canada has clearly sought help from the federal government to continue exploiting their employees. "Minister Hajdu's comments indicate a clear lack of respect for workers' rights," said Sherry Hillier, President of CUPE Newfoundland and Labrador and National General Vice President for Atlantic Canada. "By using Section 107 to force workers back on the job yet again, they're setting a pattern. And that pattern is that Liberals don't care about Canadians." Recent polling data indicates that 9 out of 10 Canadians support Air Canada flight attendants' fight for fair pay. 88% per cent of Canadians believe flight attendants should be paid for all work-related duties including boarding, delays, and safety checks. 76% support raising their pay to reflect the important safety role they play. 59% believe the federal government should respect flight attendants' right to take job action–even if it causes travel disruptions. CUPE represents over 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants across the country, and workers have been demonstrating at Halifax Stanfield International Airport since 6AM. "Messages of support have been pouring in for these workers from across the country," continued Linkletter. "Canadians stand with us. Our elected representatives should, too." View source version on Contacts Sherry HillierPresident, CUPE Newfoundland & LabradorNational General Vice President, CUPE Atlantic and Maritimes regions709-765-2996 Alan LinkletterPresident, CUPE Nova Scotiapresident@ Taylor JohnstonCUPE Atlantic Communications Representativetjohnston@ Haseena ManekCUPE Atlantic Communications Representativehmanek@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Kevin O'Leary Says If You're Single and Child-Free, Don't Buy a House — 'Are You Married? If the Answer Is No, Rent'
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. Renting might not be the American Dream — but according to Kevin O'Leary, it's the smarter choice for millions of people chasing it too soon. In a 2018 interview with CNBC, the "Shark Tank" investor laid it out bluntly: "Are you married? If the answer is no, rent." "If you're married, do you have children? No? Rent." That's not exactly the advice most people grew up hearing. For decades, homeownership has been sold as a must-do milestone. Buy a house, build equity, settle down. But O'Leary flips the script — and his reasoning has only gotten more relevant in 2025's brutally expensive housing market. Don't Miss: The same firms that backed Uber, Venmo and eBay are investing in this pre-IPO company disrupting a $1.8T market — and you can too at just $2.90/share. Warren Buffett once said, "If you don't find a way to make money while you sleep, you will work until you die." Here's how you can earn passive income with just $100. "I think the key to life — particularly when you're young — is to stay out of debt," he said, urging young adults to delay buying until they're financially stable and partnered. Why the "Debt-Free" Rule Matters More Now O'Leary points to interest rates as the silent killer behind a bad home purchase. For years, mortgage rates were dropping, making it cheaper to borrow and pushing home values higher. But that trend reversed — and reversed hard. Even back in 2018, he warned: "Interest rates aren't going down any more." In 2025, mortgage rates are higher than they've been in over a decade. Which means a $500,000 house today could cost tens of thousands more over time than it would've just a few years ago. Add in maintenance, taxes, insurance, and the risk of job instability — and the case for renting gets a little stronger. Trending: 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can invest today for just $0.30/share. Even Munger Backed That Logic Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett's longtime business partner, said it even more plainly: "The time to buy a house is when you need one." Pressed for what that meant, Munger didn't hesitate. "The single people, I don't care if they ever get a house," he said, calling it an "old-fashioned" belief he still stands by. His point? It's not about market timing or checking off a box. It's about necessity. Buying a home isn't always wealth-building. Sometimes, it's just wallet-draining. Renting Isn't Throwing Money Away — It's Buying Flexibility There's still a widespread myth that renting means "flushing money down the toilet." But in reality, renting can be a financial strategy — especially when the cost of owning is sky-high. Not to mention, renters can still invest in real estate without buying a home. Platforms like Arrived allow individuals to purchase fractional shares of rental properties — meaning you can be a landlord without ever unclogging a drain. It's one way renters can build long-term wealth while sidestepping the burdens of a full mortgage. A New Definition of "Making It" O'Leary's advice isn't anti-homeownership — it's anti-rushing. The traditional path of marriage, children, a mortgage, and the picket fence still works for plenty of people. But for single renters, or couples without kids, the pressure to buy can end up doing more harm than good. So if you're renting right now, you're not behind. You might be ahead. Especially if your bank account is healthier than your homeowning friends'. And if you're not married with kids? Well... you already know what O'Leary would say. See Next: This HELOC lender lets you borrow, repay, and borrow again —. 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can invest today for just $0.30/share. This article Kevin O'Leary Says If You're Single and Child-Free, Don't Buy a House — 'Are You Married? If the Answer Is No, Rent' originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Ottawa intervenes in Air Canada-union dispute, sending them to binding arbitration
The federal government is intervening to resolve a labour dispute between Air Canada and the union representing its flight attendants. Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu said she has invoked Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to allow binding arbitration between the airline and its union and has ordered operations to resume — although it's not immediately clear when the 10,000 flight attendants would return to work. Ottawa's involvement came Saturday afternoon, after the union representing Air Canada flight attendants said no talks were scheduled with the airline as of that morning. The union and airline met late Friday night before the flight attendants walked off the job at 12:58 a.m. ET, Wesley Lesosky, president of the Air Canada component of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), told a morning news conference. Lesosky said their last meeting was Friday night, but Air Canada offered "nothing of substance" to bring back to members. Asked when Canadians could expect to be back on flights, Lesosky said it's up to Air Canada, but that public pressure on the airline will make a "huge difference" in reaching a settlement. CBC News has reached out to Air Canada for comment and will update this story with any response. "It is unacceptable that such little progress has been made. Canadians are counting on both parties to put forward their best efforts," Hajdu said earlier on Saturday on social media platform X. Picket lines set up across Canada All Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge flights are suspended for now. Around 130,000 customers will be affected each day the strike continues, said the airline. Flights by Air Canada Express, which are operated by third-party airlines Jazz and PAL, are not affected. "Air Canada deeply regrets the effect the strike is having on customers," it said in a brief statement early Saturday morning. CUPE has set up picket lines at airports across Canada, including in Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver. Striking flight attendants also plan to picket at airports in Halifax, Ottawa and Winnipeg. In the meantime, passengers around the world are feeling the effects of the flight attendants' strike. Keelin Pringnitz and her family are from Ottawa and were returning from a European vacation, but were left stranded after flights were cancelled. "It was an end of my maternity leave kind of trip. We went to the Faroe Islands and Norway, travelling through Air Canada to London," Pringnitz said from London's Heathrow Airport. She noted there was an option for travellers to go the U.S. but she and others were told there wouldn't be any further assistance once they landed in the U.S. "It didn't go over well with the line. Nobody really seemed interested, everybody seemed a little bit amused almost at the suggestion, or exasperated, because it is a bit ridiculous to offer to take stranded passengers to a different country to strand them there." For customers due to travel soon whose flights are not yet cancelled, Air Canada said it will allow them to rebook their travel or obtain a credit for future travel. Sides at an impasse on pay Air Canada and CUPE have been in contract talks for about eight months but have yet to reach a tentative deal. Both sides say they remain far apart on the issue of pay and the unpaid work flight attendants do when planes aren't in the air. WATCH | Thousands of Air Canada flight attendants walk off the job: The airline's latest offer included a 38 per cent increase in total compensation, including benefits and pensions over four years, that it said "would have made our flight attendants the best compensated in Canada." But the union pushed back, saying the proposed eight per cent raise in the first year didn't go far enough because of inflation. Government intervention Air Canada previously asked Hajdu to intervene by ordering the parties to enter a binding arbitration process — a power granted to the minister through Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. On Friday, Hajdu urged Air Canada and the union to get back to the negotiating table, suggesting she's not ready to intervene. The minister said the union has indicated many of its demands have been met, suggesting there is a path forward to a deal. Hajdu had asked the union to respond to the company's request. CUPE indicated Friday it opposed arbitration, instead maintaining its desire to solve the impasse through bargaining. WATCH | The impact of the flight attendants' strike on travellers:
