If it works for you then great. But I would guess over 30 years and a couple of kids, one “partner” getting to go on unlimited grand vacations because they make more, while the lower earning spouse only gets crumbs is not the recipe to success or happiness. To each there own, but I think people can do better than turning marriage into a personal income accounting exercise. Presumably both partners bring something to the table, for one it may be higher income potential, for the other it may be gluing the family together - just because there are bank accounts for money doesn’t mean that it is more special than the love support and commitments to share between loving spouses. I find it odd that the high earner would claim unique benefit of the money but somehow expect fair and equal sharing of all the rest - I think that is a mistake for most in the long term. YMMV.
Do you make approximately the same amount? Seems like a little lopsided if say you made 150K / year and your wife made 35k/year. While your percentage of the shared contributions would be higher, you'd be left with a much larger disposable income after expenses then your spouse. Also, gets more complicated when you add in kids.
I've been much happier with combined finances that without, and I make 50% more than my wife. Shared goals and working together has put me light years ahead of where I was just doing my own thing spending/saving/giving as I pleased.
We make close to the same amount, but it's based on percentage. So, because I make slightly less than she does, I contribute slightly less than she does. Don't remember the exact numbers, but roughly 30% of each of our monthly income goes into the shared account.
The future will tell whether upping our contributions once we have kids will be a workable situation. For now, it works for both of us and we both feel like we have enough "extra" money to do the things we want. For us (right now), it's much better than looking at a spreadsheet every month and trying to agree who can buy what.