Nothing tests a marriage like deciding how much of your retirement should fund someone else’s bad decisions. In this case, it’s the in-laws, who treat «fixed income» like a suggestion and boutique grocery stores like a basic human right. The man spent decades being the fiscal ant: working, saving, skipping vacations, and watching compound interest like it was his kid’s graduation. Now, as he nears retirement with a hard-earned nest egg, his wife reveals a new family investment plan: charity for her parents, powered by his diligence and resentment.  

The in-laws aren’t broke, just allergic to adjustment. Even with small pensions and part-time income, they prefer artisanal poverty over practical budgeting. Supplements, premium groceries, and «bad luck» have formed an elegant self-sabotage routine that somehow ends with someone else footing the bill. And someone else, predictably, is the in-law they once thought was too uptight about money.