The last relationship I was in, she got 2/3 of my income; for 4 years, every month. Plus, I helped pay at least half on several expensive home improvement projects on her home, where we lived. About a year and a half ago, I reduced the amount I was giving her by almost 10% and her reaction stunned me. She acted as though I was reneging on a contract. I only did that because my debt had increased way more than I was comfortable with. A year later, I was out of there. I have a decent retirement income, and I'm not an extravagant spender, but when she reacted as she did, that was a big red flag for me.

Yes, you are a bad person. Life is not all about money!

It's not important to me. I've always had a good job and plan to keep working as long as I'm able. So I never do without. I enjoy working and I'm a good provider. Of course being with someone who can help is beneficial but if she's kind, generous, loving, honest, and made me happy I wouldn't care if she had an income or not. I've never been the type to say this is my money and that's yours or you pay this bill and I will pay that one. If I'm in a relationship I'm 100% in it. Even if things don't work out like they sometimes don't, like I said I have a good job I will make more money. Money is really not important to me.

Not voting here because the choices are too black and white where the reality is much grayer. I had thought I fell into the "never consider" camp, and about a year and a half ago I entered into a relationship with someone who had virtually zero income. I have a decent job, but am dealing with a lot, financially and simply can't afford it. Yes, if I were independently wealthy I'd be happy to be the sole breadwinner in an otherwise equitable relationship, but I'm not, so my SO needs to hold up their end of things in all areas of the relationship, including financially.

Any female who DOESN'T take income into consideration when considering being with a male is just asking for trouble. Unless, that is, she is financially independent and is taking on the lover for other reasons.

Men typically only care about a potential female mate being attractive, young, fertile, and willing to take care of him, since men have traditionally had the higher income.

But male-ish women who lack female instincts, and throw themselves at men, allowing dead beats to move in and take advantage of them are legion. Of course, guys are often happy to take her money, sponge off her income, and still cheat anyway.

As a straight guy I already know that women make about 3/4s or less of what I make so I pay more attention to what she spends her money on, if she spends it all, has heavy credit card debt or is saving for a special thing she wants are big indicators. To me her attitude toward sex is way more important than how much she makes because I also know if I'm inspired by a sexually satisfying relationship I can easily go out and get as much money as I want to.

Wow, I am really surprised at the results. I just don't think it's important, of course I suppose the circumstances could make a difference, but the person's character, personality, beliefs or non-beliefs, and our chemistry is what matters to me. Maybe it doesn't matter to me because I live a very basic life. idk?

This is not really relevant to me anymore, but I was a single mother of 3 children, and their father moved to another state just to avoid child support--and I never did receive a dime. It was a real and constant struggle in every way, and the financial struggle made it so much worse...there was so much they missed out on because I couldn't afford it...So, yes, to me a partner's annual income is very important.

Also, being so poor affects every aspect of life. Not being able to afford entertainment, such as group sports, or even classes, is very restricting and depressing. If I were to enter into a relationship, I would want to be sure that we could afford basic niceties and then some. Otherwise, I think the strain would be too much for the relationship.

There's nothing wrong with considering someone's income, but it's important to also consider why that income is what it is. Are they unmotivated or bad at what they do? Or maybe they're new in their career (either young or a recent career change)? Or maybe they chose a career that doesn't pay as well but which they find fulfilling?

I think a more important thing to look at is regardless of their income, do they live within it, or do they live beyond their means.

I certainly take it into account. I have a very low income, if I could it would be zero. ie if I could reduce my expenses enough. That said, many women would see me as a potential user or that I would want their money.

I dated an extremely powerful and wealthy woman a few years back, she wanted to buy me with all sorts of promises. I was not interested, and then she came out with other issues. I would not be able to have my young friends come and stay when they were in need because her money would be going into the household. I had suggested that if anything were to come of us that we could each put in the same amount and she should keep the rest of hers to herself, she didn't want her lifestyle restricted by my lower income. Her plan was we would travel anywhere I wanted to go and she would buy herself a house anywhere I wanted to live and I had to live as she determined.

So my situation is the reverse, I do not feel comfortable if the woman had a noticeably higher level of income than I did. My concern has nothing to do with any macho idea of the guy being the breadwinner. Ideology is a big issue, I enjoy/prefer not having money, it is by choice, a choice I have revisited many times.

I guess since I work in the restaurant industry for a <laughing> 'living, then I'm always going to be at the bottom of the financial food-chain... as a result, I'm not exactly in a position to take my partner's income into account. I suppose I'd be the one who gets taken into account when it comes to that.

I won't lie. It's not something I think about when entering a relationship. She or he doesn't have to have a lot monetarily to be with me. They just have to be a good person.

It's absolutely important to me. I am not in a position to carry the weight of another, since I make only a regular middle income myself.

I want to travel (for leisure and my family is all over the country) and experience activities and sites and life -- that takes money.

I don't want to be working past typical retirement age.

I like food -- home food, restaurant food, cheap food and no-so-cheap food.

I was in poverty most of my childhood, a single mom for most of my daughter's life, and I got a late start taking seriously my 401-k and saving. I've paid my dues and my days of paycheck-to-paycheck (or anything like it) are over.

If I alone made enough money for me and my partner to live the way I want to live, the second salary would not be as much of a concern to me.

I voted yes. Income falls into the category of fiscal responsibility (speaking for myself). When it comes to actually making a relationship work, fiscal responsibility is extremely important.

It's not so much income but net worth and fiscal responsibility. I lost half of everything I had earned in my life in a divorce. I paid about $200K in spousal support (no kids), she got a cabin on 45 acres that she sold for $650K, a luxury SUV, and half of my stuff and cash. I have now recovered from that and want to retire soon.

For me, the most important thing is being able to support your spending habits and eventual retirement. So living beneath your means to enable saving and / or investing. No credit card or consumer debt. Good credit rating.

Of course I often date women who don't meet these criteria. I wouldn't live with anyone without an iron clad pre-cohabitation agreement.

I'm not so much concerned with the amount, as with their level of control over their finances. I pay attention to whether or not someone can pay their bills on time, afford their desired lifestyle, have some sort of regular income, and appreciate what they have - regardless of how much or how little.

I'm less concerned about what a person makes than I am about whether they have a reason to get up and go do something besides lay around the house all day.

That being said, since my earnings are barely middle class, and I help support my grandchildren, anyone I entered into a relationship with would have to at least not be a drain on my finances.

Some callings do not rake in the bucks. Passion for your calling is worth a lot, especially a calling that makes this world a little better.

I never used to care, but after being coerced into supporting my ex for 5 years, anyone I date must have a J-O-B. They don't have to be rich, just able to support themselves in the event of a breakup. I'll never make that mistake again.

I voted I do consider it but I think if it's going to be a live together or married situation my income must be considered too.

ETA: I lived with a girlfriend and we had two kids. I was working full time and she had a part-time job.
The amount of money we were paying each week for someone just to watch the kids after school had gotten to be as much or more than what she was earning so we decided that she could quit her job and pick up our kids after school.
We came out ahead in the end.

I require someone I'm dating to have a job and pay their own bills. Beyond that it's none of my business.

I voted "yes". But only to the extent that they need to have an income. How much income is not a factor. That they have income is.

She's gotta own a house on Martha's Vineyard.

I have ALWAYS considered income. I've held it in high importance, as I provide for my children and myself, no one else. I still feel this way, however, how much someone makes is really not an issue anymore. I have learned in these years of being alone, that finding a someone who can make you happy in life is a tad more important than status or income, at my age.

I have everything I NEED. It's what I WANT that holds value in a relationship.

Income has to be a part of any relationship. Otherwise one is doing all the supporting. This is not a healthy situation. My late partner and I switched several times between being the prime supporter and the secondary. Some things like medical and house were always on my shoulder. Toward the end I was to be the prime until she reached the right age for SS and then we would share equally.

I don't have a large income but there is more than enough for the basics and I actually save. I also have a nice nest egg. With my house situation I would hope a future person would be able to buy half of the equity. My late partner's will stated her half would go to donations to some groups and that would need to be addressed. The main thing I look for is not having a little income but having too much. Mine is not a situation for a large income and someone with such would expect more than I would want to give.