I would prefer to have a partner who earned less money and was around more than one who earned more and was constantly working or thinking about work. Some of the fellas I went to college with put career and ambition ahead of everything else and that just wouldn't suit me, no matter how much money they were earning or how many expensive presents I got 'to make up for it'.
However... I would find financial recklessness, work-shy laziness and total lack of ambition big turn-offs in a partner, even if they were an otherwise lovely man. It wouldn't be a particularly equal relationship if one party is doing all the working and earning and the other is doing all the spending.
It'd be different if I had children though - having one stay-at-home parent and one working parent means two of you are working, rather than one of you working while the other plays the PS3 or goes shopping all day. Or like Casiopea said - if one is studying, that's a different story.
And Triplex - I've read Jennifer Kloster's book as well and read a lot of Georgette Heyer and Jane Austen generally. The financial stuff being so up-front is very different but understandable in a time when women had virtually no ability to earn any money to help the family out. All they could do was budget and scrimp. Love's all very well but it doesn't mend the roof or put food on the table!
