The plainest word for it is unconventional
The plainest word for your relationship with money and possessions is unconventional. Saturn in Aquarius in the 2nd house means what you value does not line up with what the people around you value, and you have had to construct your own arrangement from scratch.
The 2nd house is what you actually hold; Aquarius applies its own criteria rather than the inherited ones. Saturn requires the arrangement to be sound. So you have thought about money considerably more than most people and arrived somewhere that looks eccentric from outside and is entirely coherent from within.
They think you are impractical, which is backwards
Because your priorities are unusual, people conclude you are careless about money, when the reality is that you have examined it more carefully than they have and reached different conclusions. The misreading persists because explaining the reasoning takes longer than anybody wants to listen. It is worth having a one-sentence version prepared.
The weight is wanting things nobody else wants
The ordinary markers — the house, the car, the accumulation — do not motivate you, and the things that do are difficult to explain and often difficult to buy. That leaves you without the standard incentives that organise most people's working lives, and without a ready answer when somebody asks what you are working toward.
It comes due when the arrangement has to be ordinary
The test is a situation requiring you to fit the standard financial template: a mortgage application, a joint arrangement, a system that assumes a conventional income and a conventional set of wants. Your position is sound and it does not present well on a form. Preparing the translation in advance is the practical answer to a recurring difficulty.
Security built on your own terms
What this builds is a financial position designed for the life you actually intend rather than the one the templates assume, which is rare and takes considerable independent thought. It is worth writing down, both because you will otherwise keep re-deriving it and because nobody else will ever produce it for you.
You will not chase what everybody else is chasing
Property fever, market enthusiasms and whatever your peer group is currently doing with money have essentially no effect on you, which has saved you from several expensive collective mistakes. The corresponding risk is contrarianism as a reflex: occasionally the crowd is right, and a position taken purely because it is different is no better reasoned than one taken purely because it is popular.
You are paid for the thing you invented
Your earning tends to attach to something you devised rather than to a defined role: the approach nobody was using, the service that did not exist, the way of doing it that turned out to be better. That is genuinely valuable and it is difficult to price, since there is no comparable. Set the number by what it saves the buyer rather than by what similar-sounding work costs.
Money arrangements get negotiated from first principles
You will not simply adopt the default way couples handle finances; you want to work out what is actually fair given both situations. That is admirable and it turns a routine matter into a substantial discussion. Partners who were expecting to inherit a template can find the process alarming, and saying in advance that you intend to design it makes it considerably easier.
Your spending puzzles the people who know you
You will decline something ordinary and spend substantially on something nobody around you understands, and the pattern has been consistent enough that friends have stopped predicting it. It is coherent and it is not visible from outside. Occasionally explaining one such choice does more for how you are understood than a great deal of conversation about anything else.
You have opinions about what the body needs
Your approach here is worked out rather than inherited: you have read, considered, and arrived at a position that differs from the conventional one, and you follow it consistently. That independence is real and it needs a check built in. A framework that never gets tested against outside evidence becomes as unexamined as the one you rejected.