This page sponsored by Madame S, San Francisco    [other banners]

	SD! : Web boards : IE Theory : "Finances" 1 2 3 4 Finances (39) 16 Jul 08, 6:30 PM 879-717-990 UK, 2 yrs ravenkaldera wrote: Addressing the OP's question here: The way that financial ownership works with us is that I own him, so I own everything that he owns. That has nothing to do with legal ownership. If he owned a house (on paper), it would still be my house because I would make all the decisions about it. Even if I didn't feel like making the decisions about it, and told him to handle it, that would still be me issuing an order and him following my wishes - ergo, it's still my house, he's just the caretaker. So it goes with all his possessions, which are few. He earns money, deposits his paycheck, and pays the bills from it - because I've ordered that. He is "stewarding" my money for me when he does this. If he wants to buy something for himself or someone else, he comparison-shops to get the absolute best buy, gives me a rundown of what and how much and how this will affect our finances, and I decide whether he can do it. Usually I'm fine with it because he's cheap and not a spendthrift, and has thought it through well. I can spend what I like from the account, although I have another separate one which is more often used for my spending. I usually check in with him to make sure that a purchase doesn't affect the balance in a bad way - that's not me asking permission, it's me getting instant information to make my decision. I may ask him to shop around and find me a better deal for something. (He has excellent Bookfinder skills, for example.) When we got together, I had no credit and he had a credit card, which he put me on. I bought the car; he drives and maintains it for me. Even if I had put his name on it, it would be mine. I could choose to use his name as a place to hide taxable dollars - they would still be mine. He is a financial resource to be used by me. The end result is that he has no say in my financial decisions while I have total say in his. That's what ownership is about. Even if the dominant says, "You handle that piece of property, I don't want to," the sub is following their orders, and being self-maintaining property. -Raven Kaldera Thank you Raven. This is more or less the situation we have here. i would not make a purchase of any real merit without asking permission but i generally am expected to make all purchases for the home, cars, etc using my own judgment, while my Owner will buy anything He wants when He wishes. i am lucky however that i am asked my opinion on big purchases such as cars and home improvements. i have to say that i am very well treated financially but do look forward to a time when i am unencumbered by the burden of a mortgage on a home that neither of us live in. slave tsina 17 Jul 08, 1:22 AM slaveo US(TX), 8 mths I am going to throw a kink into this conversation I think. I feel better about posting this since reading Raven's post. I think he, and others, may be interested in what I found. In ancient times there were several different types of slaves. Some were actually allowed to own property, conduct some business independently, and be married and have children. These posessions/rights were considered owned by the slave. Other slaves were not recognized as having ownership privelages. Some were even the type where the owner owned the slaves spouse and children. I am wondering if this historical take on slavery might actually have a place in TPE in our culture. It would allow for slaves retaining ownership of some things, but still recognize them as slaves. For more information on this you can check out the wikipedia entry on ancient Greek slavery. slaveo 19 Jul 08, 7:11 PM 000-733-561 BE, 8 yrs Y! We are married, so my Mistress knows 100% what my assets or income's are/were. I signed an agreement stating that She lent me an amount of money before our mariage, so that I'll always have to repay my "debt". This makes me bound in a financial way as well. When it comes to income, She has the signature of the account the wages come to. And when it comes to any descisions, She has the final word. That's the way we like it. Works well for us, but others might act in another way. 5 Sep 08, 1:57 AM kashta US, 9 mths Y! During my previous enslavement, this matter was decided by my Master long before we transitioned from Dom/sub to Master/slave. It was his decision to grant me additional rights/privledges and to assign specific duties for me that he felt were important... mainly that the care and needs of my disabled mother would always come first, that I could continue to work outside the home however I wished to, and that he wanted me to handle the finances for both of us. For a Master to not make full use of his slave's intelligence and abilities when it suits him better this way merely in the interest of custom or protocol is just plain silly. He didn't want that responsibility from the start and said many times that he would suck at it if he was the one who had to make sure our bills got paid. _____________ "If Passion drives, let Reason hold the reins." 5 Sep 08, 10:10 PM little_linnet US, 3 yrs ravenkaldera wrote: The way that financial ownership works with us is that I own him, so I own everything that he owns. That has nothing to do with legal ownership. If he owned a house (on paper), it would still be my house because I would make all the decisions about it. Bingo. Once you live being owned, this sort of thing stops being a complicated question. What a legal piece of paper says I own (or have access to) has zero to do with whether Mr L allows me to do as I choose with it. Krista The thing you have to remember about girls is that the hyperfluid bearings under the camshafts can be miscalibrated along either axis, so regular maintanence is required to keep resonance in the titanium casing from causing abrasions against the primary sprocket joists. Edited 5 Sep 08, 10:11 PM by little_linnet 6 Sep 08, 8:01 AM anjuli UK, 18 mths little_linnet wrote: ravenkaldera wrote: The way that financial ownership works with us is that I own him, so I own everything that he owns. That has nothing to do with legal ownership. If he owned a house (on paper), it would still be my house because I would make all the decisions about it. Bingo. What she said! It's all in the POWER exchange. If you retain independence of thought and decision then it's not TOTAL power exchange, that's all. Sometimes it's not practical or practicable to transfer ownership of every damn thing legally but if you hand over the power over them then the result is all. Perhaps the problem is with getting that the terms M/s and slavery and enslavement are borrowed not copied, dare I say it, slavishly? <grins> anjuli ~~~ “I, with a deeper instinct, choose a man who compels my strength, who makes enormous demands on me, who does not doubt my courage or my toughness, who does not believe me naive or innocent, who has the courage to treat me like a woman.” - Anais Nin ~~~ 19 Nov 08, 6:13 PM 682-645-503 UK, 2 mths girl is in a similar situation to some of the other posters.. 1. Master is pants at balancing the accounts..(He tries like mad, but we end up with more month than money) 2. W/we have a 29 year age gap between us.. 3. Masters ex, still wont sign the divorce papers.. so.. we have come up with a solution that suits Us. This girls wages go into her personal account..Masters wages go into His personal account. The day after the wages have gone in (time allowed for bank holidays ect) any money in both accounts is removed..allowing for Direct Debits ect. The money to live on goes in one tin, any other money goes in another tin. Girl is given free-reign and use of the groceries (living-on) tin, on the understanding that it must last a month. girl is then given an amount each week to spend or save as she wishes. Actually, thinking about it, girl has no idea what Master does with His half of the money.. but then.. thats His. The rest of the money from the second tin, gets used in the best way possible, for both parties.. as with RavenKaldera, Master can ask this girl at any moment in time how much is available to spend..and she can tell Him.. in NOWAY is He asking my opinion, merely utilising me as an ATM. As for the age-gap and the ex-wife thing.. that still needs sorting.. Master still hasn't got Himself round to writing His own will (actually quite straightforward) and although girl has the legal know-how to write one for Him.. girl would hate to presume what His wishes would be. (Wonders if she would be ok, to tie Master to a chair until He decides what to do??? ) Having made a mutual decision to take Oour relationship this far, and not having a contract, girl finds it interesting to see the differences in styles of other M/s (or other) relationships. Property of Master Nid, girl is slave - her purpose is to please and be pleasing. 19 Nov 08, 6:23 PM jjsslave US(OH), 14 mths I think its possible but in my situation i have 2 accounts, one in my name and one thats in his. And on the account in his name is set up so that if anything should happen to him, i'm the benificiary and would be able to do whatever i need to with it. Also He gave me the atm card to it and the pin so that i can access it if i need. i usually let him know before i take anything out of it, and in a way we use it as our emergency fund. completely devoted to Master 20 Nov 08, 12:40 AM 119-812-164 US, 2 mths Y! 000-144-008 wrote: All, With all due respect, it's entirely possible. Before the final contracts are complete there are some things that take place, the main one is how will the slave be provided for once they leave service or if the owner is no longer responsible. ... Slavery is not so cut and dry as the textbook definition. As with all that we do there is negotiation prior to the final contract and ownership. in many ancient slave cultures (granted they were not IE but certainly TPE), highly valued slaves were allowed to own property, have some of their own crops, buy and trade lifestock. it was by such means that slaves were often able to buy their own freedom if they so chose to do so. slaves were sometimes valued more highly for their skills and while they might be allowed by a Master to keep their earnings, their skills were subject to the control of the Master for hiring out and use to the Master's discretion. i don't know what this says about contemporary consensual slavery, but i would think it would follow that if possible in physical enslavement, and in tpe, it should be possible in IE; especially since the subject seems to be 'what is possible', not necessarily what is probable, effective, or desirable ... no? i am curious about this as my M/s relationship is in its developing stages. Daddy says that my money is my money. He intends to go through all of my finances, control how i spend it, where i spend it, etc. and he insists on having also a formal system of providing for me financially as well, in an account in both of our names into which he puts an 'allowance'. . i suppose the question as i understand it is also a matter of whether we are simply talking about 'controlling' assets or also 'claiming' assets. there are so many variables that it does seem impossible to say, definitively, that there is only one 'authentic' scenario. for slaves who are in middle age, they may have many sort of assetts and benefits coming to them from inheritance, state allowances, pensions, etc. even if a Master 'claims' them as well as 'controls' them, they still belong to the slave unti the slave is able to 'sign' them over ... so it can't really be deemed 'impossible' even if it is improbable in the way i see the scenario playing out . these conditions, though, are completely dependent on the way a pair 'practices' M/s ... which is so individualized, it is hard to see how IE is not also individualized in some aspect ... can this be so? The happiness of a man in this life does not consist in the absence but in the mastery of his passions.-- Alfred Lord Tennyson (1809 - 1892) Edited 20 Nov 08, 12:55 AM by 119-812-164