OP hasn't been back, so I'm not going to feel bad for highjacking this thread. I had a little snit fit/ knee jerk reaction to this thread and thankfully deleted it, once I got over myself.
But now I honesty want to ask.
Why is pooling the "of course" and separate the "but why" choice? I've never seen separate as something to justify, or fix, or like we're doing something sub-optimal. I also don't see it as a choice that's about how we would divid things at the possible ending, but as the choice we made during the doing. But will pooling our money really make us a happier couple? My main goal for FIRE is to increase my happiness, so maybe I've been looking at this wrong?
We keep our finances totally separate. I like knowing that I'm doing this thing together, but also as individuals. I'm a big fan of the two trees in a forest thing, together but as individuals. (yes I've read the research on tree symbiosis, but the metaphor still works, lol)
My partner and I talk about money a lot, a lot a lot. I love to talk about my FIRE plans and go on and on. I convinced him that he had more than enough to FIRE 4ish years ago. He was grateful to have my support and to give him the push he needed to not OMY. I'll fire end of 2025.
What am I missing that we would get from pooling?
Pooling, to a certain degree, by default matches the laws as they apply to marriage.
If you want to keep things separate, your arrangement is in opposition to most jurisdiction's marriage laws, so you need to customize those laws with a prenup to make a separate finances situation safe and reasonable.
Otherwise, as I have said repeatedly in this thread, separate finances are INCREDIBLY dangerous, as it leaves each person totally blind to what's happening in half of the financial affairs of their own legal financial entity.
This would be like two business partners running different departments and acting like each is a separate company when in fact, they're one legal financial entity. One side can take both sides down.
If you want to operate as separate financial entities within a contract that is designed *not* to work that way, then you have to customize that contract.
That tends to be a lot more work and hassle. Hence why it's not the default.
Also, the VAST majority of people who keep separate finances do so to avoid talking about money. So the behaviour tends to correlate with poor financial relations while also dramatically raising risk.
It's GREAT that separate finances works for your marriage, but I don't think the generally judgement against it has anything to do with couples like you and your spouse.
It has to do with the overwhelming number of people out there who avoid talking about money at all costs, and who actively hide their personal finances from their partner, which is far, FAR more common than your situation.