I don't budget a month ahead - Is that an issue?

Any month that I am fully funding my categories and I have leftover money (i.e $200), I will add that to my emergency fund, as I am trying to have 6 months of liquidity. In addition, I leave the leftover money from each category in the category and let it roll to the next month (i.e $100 for groceries, I only spend $80, and $20 rolls to the following month). 

So, while I have never really been budgeting a month ahead, a lot of my categories end up having some sort of a buffer from the following months over time.

 

Is adding extra funds to my emergency fund or letting money from categories roll to the following month an issue? If so, what should I be doing differently?

52replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • Yes, I'd say you could improve some things. For instance, if you roll $20 to next month's groceries and budget the entire $100 -- resulting in $120 in the category -- you are not presenting your desired target. "Lifestyle creep" is quite likely. Instead, when the month switches, consider budgeting $80 (resulting in the nominal monthly amount).

    The extra $20 can be put in the new next month's area or in an explicit "next month's money" category. The point is, the "getting ahead" is not influencing your spending decision when you look at that category, since those are based on the nominal amount in the current month.

    I favor the latter since it's possible to cause the future month to be shorted and the only warning is on that future month's page -- typically not visible when the overallocation is made.

    Like 3
      • Green Filly
      • Green_Filly.5
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui To clarify, I never plan to spend my monthly amount + the previous months. I always try to stick to the monthly budget I set. I consider myself pretty frugal so I do not see lifestyle creep happening (at least for now).  However, with food I will sometimes go over. However, with my entertainment category (concerts, sports, etc.) I set aside $100 a month and I now have a $350+ buffer.

      Like 2
    • May I suggest you keep budgeting $100 per month to that category.  One month you save $15, another you go over by $5.  Over time, it can yield a helpful buffer should you ever have a month that is quiet on the income front.  This is what I do when I budget for The Stores (aka groceries) category, just keep it at $150  per month.

      Like
  • There is no right or wrong way. As long as it gets you where you are going.

    It sounds like your main priority is funding the emergency fund. So you may consider sweeping extra money at the end of the month to that category.

    I second the idea of creating an income for next month category. The goal is to have enough in that category to budget an entire month at a time. Essentially you are a month ahead. Another form of liquidity. Like right now, I have all the money I need to budget for June.

    Like 3
  • I personally think it's a mistake [Edit: missed opportunity] to grow an emergency fund rather than push your income further forward, ideally all the way into next month's area. (I do not recommend going beyond that, however.)

    Yes, that flies in the face of "conventional wisdom", but hear me out so you can make an informed decision.

    The reason is that being able to budget all your income in next month's area makes things much more clear and much more convenient. You'll note it is a simple matter to reallocate from next month's area IF, and I repeat, IF you happen to have a large enough emergency that would require more than remains in your Emergency Fund. Basically, it's doing nothing until you have an emergency, right? I say put it to use improving your budgeting process. Again, you can always switch it back if needed.

    Long term, I'd suggest having both: being ahead enough to live on last month's income as well has have an emergency fund. Actually, I'd suggest several emergency-like funds; e.g., Auto Deductible, Medical Deductible, Income Replacement, and so forth. I realize those take a while to grow, which is why people get by with a single Emergency Fund in the short term when funds are tighter.

    Like 5
      • Green Filly
      • Green_Filly.5
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui My emergency fund is essentially 4-6 months of all (reasonable) expenses I were to occur if I were to lose an income source - so it is fairly large.

      Like 1
  • Green Filly said:
    I always try to stick to the monthly budget I set.

    But how do you do that when there's $120 in the category at the beginning of the month (assuming $100 is the nominal amount)? How do you know you're supposed to leave $20 in there -- or $40 next month if you happen to only spend $80 again? That's my point. My recommendation is to move those additional funds away from where you look for spending guidance. That way everything in the Available column really is available.

    (Yes, I realize you can look at the Activity and target $100, but why not be consistent? I'm sure you use the Available column for categories with non-monthly outflows.)

    Like 3
    • dakinemaui You are correct - I stick to the budgeted number that I have set. I have been treating the extra money as a cushion. However, certain categories have a larger cushion than others - perhaps I could slim those down? 

      Like
    • Green Filly I guess in my mind, if I were to have an extra $20 ($50 total) for going out in January I didn't spend, I would rather roll that to the next month and if need be, use all $70 vs only having $50 and accidentally going over $20 and having to pull money from somewhere else. Does that make sense? 

      Like
      • PhysicsGal
      • Nerdy female homo sapien
      • physicsgal
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Green Filly It depends on your goals.  I'm on a pretty tight budget, trying to get out of debt and save up an emergency fund while also maxing out my 2019 and 2020 Roth IRA all in the 2020 year, so I am more prone to underbudget so that I have to pull money from somewhere else if I go over.  it's too easy for me to spend that money if it's already there.  It's fairly easy to move money, but psychologically, it's a barrier that I've crossed that I wouldn't have felt if the money were already sitting in that category.

      Like 1
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      Green Filly 

      Green Filly said:
      I would rather roll that to the next month and if need be, use all $70 vs only having $50 and accidentally going over $20 and having to pull money from somewhere else.

      The contrary view is to move that $20 to accelerate your highest priority category. The idea is to establish a Plan A that is in line with all your priorities and the information available at that time. If you leave it, knowing that you'll probably only spend $50, then your plan doesn't match your priorities as well as it could. You've missed a chance to improve the financial standing of something more important to you.

      Like 2
  • There is no right or wrong way. But being able to budget for the whole month at once often gives a better picture of one's finances. 

    But it might also depend on your income frequency. If you receive income weekly, you get a very piecemeal view of your finances. E.g. if you need to spend more on grocery during a week, you'll need to move money from somewhere else, whereas if you have budgeted for the month it might balance with following grocery expenses during the month. 

    If you receive income every other week or twice a month, it isn't too bad but still quite a short time window for expenses to balance out. 

    Another example, I'd rather do a few big shopping trips than a lot of small shopping trips. This isn't necessarily possible if I don't have the category entirely budgeted at the start of the month. Then I can do my shopping when it is convenient for me during the month, rather than everything at the end of the month when I get enough budgeted in categories.

    Like 3
  • No, it's not an issue. Most new YNAB users aren't a month ahead. I wasn't when I started. But it does simplify things greatly once you are able to budget next month with this month's income. Everybody has different priorities but what I did was first build up a $1000 emergency fund. Then I started working on my Income for Next Month category. I just kept adding all extra dollars to it month after month until I had a full month's worth of expenses. Then I was able to budget next month with this month's income. Next is when I started to continue building my 6 months of liquidity.

    You see from the example above that at this point, you'll have one month of liquidity. It's not in your emergency fund but it's available if you really needed to access it. It would just reduce your ability to budget a month ahead until you could replenish it.

    Like 7
      • PhysicsGal
      • Nerdy female homo sapien
      • physicsgal
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      Superbone I was listening to Jesse's podcast and he counted someone's buffer as one month of their emergency fund, so if he does it, we sure can.

      Like 2
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      PhysicsGal Most definitely! 😄

      Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      PhysicsGal It's a lovely thought, but unless you get paid once a month at beginning of the month and push it into next month, it's not really ever one month's worth of money, except as you transition into the next month.

      Like
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule As soon as you get your last paycheck, it is.

      Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Superbone 

      Superbone said:
      nolesrule As soon as you get your last paycheck, it is.

       Sure, but the closer you are to the end of the month, the less time it has to still be a full month of income.

      And really, it's the last income event of the month, which for most people with normal banks is going to be the last day of the month. :)

      And remember, you can be fully buffered but paid once a month on the last day of the month.  So one really cannot make a blanket statement that the buffer is one month of the emergency fund, and in fact I'd argue for most people it's not the case.

      I don't know about you, but our last check is on the last day of the month. But my mortgage payment hits on the first day after the last day of the month, so as soon as I change months I'm already down to less than a month of income in my buffer.

      Like 1
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule I'm paid fortnightly so it varies every month but very rarely at the end of the month and if it is, it was a 3 paycheck month.

      Like 1
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view
      nolesrule said:
      really, it's the last income event of the month

      In my view, it's the first income event of the month. After all, it's from that point forward that must be covered by other means to allow you to push those checks into next month. I agree with @nolesrule that it's rarely an entire month's worth of money.

      Edit: Now I see you're talking when the timer starts for the "month-sized" chunk. Yes, that's after the last income event of the month.

      Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view
      PhysicsGal said:
      he counted someone's buffer as one month of their emergency fund

      Do you count your Vacation fund as part of your EF? How about your Mortgage payment? Your annual Auto Insurance or Property Taxes?

      I disagree it's one month of an emergency fund in the typical sense of money to handle unexpected expenses. Just because your furnace craps out (i.e., an "emergency" because you don't have a Furnace Repair category) doesn't mean you don't still have many of your obligations that will consume those funds.

      Don't forget, Jesse's "buffer" is money that is simply 30 days old (or more) -- we're talking AoM here -- and Rule 2 funds typically plays a huge role in why money is as old as it is. (You just haven't incurred the outflow, yet.)

      You might be able to reallocate from True Expenses that are further out, but that's a temporary measure because it has to be paid back (before that outflow occurs). That's practically the same thing as using credit as an Emergency Fund -- it has to be paid back, too. Credit is arguably more "usable" than reallocating from a TE because the timeframe is at your discretion (though there is a potential cost for that flexibility).

      Do you think Jesse would cite unused credit qualifies as an Emergency Fund? I doubt it, which would completely derail the position that the "buffer" -- a significant portion of which is True Expense money -- is synonymous with an EF.

      Like 1
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui 

      dakinemaui said:
      Now I see you're talking when the timer starts for the "month-sized" chunk. Yes, that's after the last income event of the month.

       Exactly. You only have that extra month fully intact from the time you receive the last income intended for the next month and the first expense event. For some people they might receive more income before the first expense event, but I bet most people will have a rent or mortgage payment due on the first.

      Like
      • PhysicsGal
      • Nerdy female homo sapien
      • physicsgal
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui I don't consider myself buffered even though I'm paid once a month on the last business day of the month.  Personally I only have an emergency fund because of this, and not buffer/INM/budgeting ahead for me.   I'm building my E-fund up so it's not as large as I want it to be, yet.  I've considered using the INM category and using a buffer, but it doesn't seem worth the extra effort when I don't gain much from it because of being paid on a monthly pay cycle.

      But if one can live on one's income without being a month ahead, then being a month ahead would be an extra month of cushion between you and being broke compared to when you had no buffer, so it's not nothing, especially for most normal people who don't use YNAB or budget so probably don't have much true expenses saved like YNABers.  Plus if your buffer is one month of income, so you can fund ALL of your goals in one fell swoop, and your E-fund is measured by months of expenses, then your buffer could be more than a month of expenses.  

      Like 1
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      PhysicsGal Yeah, I don't think INM is needed for your case. You can already budget a month at a time. You can just concentrate on building your EF or Income Replacement fund or whatever you want to call it for however many months of income you desire.

      Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      PhysicsGal Being paid on the last day of the month, I wouldn't use an INM category. The primary purpose is to keep funds out of the way during most of the month until you've received all your income.

      Like 1
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view
      PhysicsGal said:
      being a month ahead would be an extra month of cushion between you and being broke compared to when you had no buffer

      Jesse's version is you're living on money you received at least 30 days ago. It does NOT necessarily mean you're a month ahead. For illustration, assume I'm contributing to a True Expense category that's due in Dec, and because of those funds, my money is more than 30 days old when I spend it on daily expenses. That is not extra cushion against some other expense, because if I didn't have it, I can't pay the bill when it comes due.

      That's the problem with the "age" definition of a buffer. True Expense contributions do NOT get you "ahead". They merely keep you from falling behind when it's time to pay the piper. 

      Certainly, that's better than when you don't have those savings, because in that case you couldn't pay that expense when it came due.

      Like 2
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view
      PhysicsGal said:
      if your buffer is one month of income, so you can fund ALL of your goals in one fell swoop

      I see we've switched back to the classic Buffer, now. Most people's Buffer is NOT one month of income. (It's a very common misunderstanding.) Yours, for instance, is about $0 because you didn't have to save anything to be able to budget all of next month (having all your income arrive at the end of the month).

      (I'm assuming you don't have any expenses that occur between your check and the end of the month.)

      Like 2
  • Green Filly said:
    Is adding extra funds to my emergency fund or letting money from categories roll to the following month an issue? If so, what should I be doing differently?

    I don't think there's any issue!  Adding money to your emergency fund is good. That's a real job.

    And rolling over to the following month is also fine. For example, I have Holiday category that gets larger every month. That's ok.

    The money has to have a real job though, there shouldn't be five months of groceries in the groceries category. This blog might be interesting:

    So, give your savings dollars a real job, and be specific! Don’t just create a category called “Savings,”

    Like 3
  • It's completely personal preference. What I did was use my (not-yet-completely funded) 6 months emergency category and changed it to a 5 months emergency category and created a Next Month's Budget (or Income for Next Month, whatever you like) category, and funded that. I like how easy it makes it to start out each month. You can always give it a try and if you find it doesn't float your boat, pull the money back into your efund and rename it to 6 months again. Personally, I plan to eventually change my 5 month efund category to a 5 (or maybe 6) month Income Replacement category, along with the Next Month's Budget category, but for now I like the more manageable goal.

    Like 4
    • Peter
    • Professional Designer, Web Developer
    • lasty
    • 3 mths ago
    • 2
    • Reported - view

    I'm the same way. I get kinda nervous when the emergency fund and true expenses don't at least have some balance, so for a long time I did both, add a bit of the left over funds to the emergency fund and add the rest to the rent for next month.

    Now that I'm basically a month ahead except for minor fluctuations, I concentrate more on my emergency fund and true expenses again.

    Both age my money and I'd say it really comes down to personal preference. Money in the bank is money in the bank regardless of its place in the budget and if I really need it to not do what I planned for it to do I can always roll with the punches.

    Like 2
  • PhysicsGal said:
    I don't consider myself buffered even though I'm paid once a month on the last business day of the month. 

     You are buffered if you use the previous month's income to fund the current month. This is not the same as "being a month ahead". It sounds like you're buffered to me.

    It's not subjective. It's a measurable definition.

    Like 4
  • PhysicsGal said:
    I don't consider myself buffered even though I'm paid once a month on the last business day of the month

    You're right, there are other criteria that determine if you're buffered. Arguably the most important is, "Can I fund all of monthly goals at once?" Another might be, "Would I be impacted if my paycheck were delayed by a few days?" Depending on a paycheck received on the last day of the month to cover expenses on the first day of the month would send me back to pre-buffered anxiety levels. How about, "Can I pay my bills as soon as they drop, without timing them?" What other tests tell if we've met the the spirit of the buffer/30-day-AOM guidance?

    Like 1
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Owlette 

      Owlette said:
      You're right, there are other criteria that determine if you're buffered. Arguably the most important is, "Can I fund all of monthly goals at once?" Another might be, "Would I be impacted if my paycheck were delayed by a few days?"

       Nah, you're confusing "buffered" with other things.

      If you send all your income from one month to the next month and you can't fund all your monthly goals at once, you're living above your means.

      If you are impacted by a delayed paycheck, it's a question of whether you can cover the shortage with an adequate income replacement fund temporarily.

      You're buffered if you use one month's income to fund the following month's budget. No more, no less.

      Like 1
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view
      Owlette said:
      What other tests tell if we've met the the spirit of the buffer/30-day-AOM guidance?

      I think you're mixing the two types of "buffers": 1) Jesse's hold money for 30+ days (Old Money) or 2) Live on Last Month's income (Classic Buffer). Furthermore, #2 increases the age of your money, but #1 does not necessarily yield #2.

      Can I fund all of monthly goals at once? -- Yes, if you have a Classic Buffer. Maybe, if you have Old Money. (That "maybe" turns to "yes" ONLY if you are also classically buffered.)

      Would I be impacted if my paycheck were delayed by a few days? -- Maybe if you have a Classic Buffer, turning to no if the delay were less than the inherent shift. Maybe if you have Old Money, turning to no if you can borrow some of it that's intended for other expenses without leaving them short -- meaning, "old enough", which may be more than 30 days depending on the size of the expense.

      Can I pay my bills as soon as they drop, without timing them? -- Yes, if you have a Classic Buffer (and sufficient money in the categories, of course). Maybe, if you have Old Money, turning to yes if you can borrow some of it that's intended for other expenses without getting burned, so perhaps greater than 30 days.

      In other words, the Old Money buffer can only ever answer, "Maybe" to all these questions -- which are supremely relevant, BTW. The lack of "Maybe" answers is why many veterans prefer the Classic Buffer. The primary gray area is the inherent shift, as that varies from case to case, which may cause someone to grow an emergency fund.

      BTW, the Classic Buffer has a very simple test: can you budget all income received this month in next month's area? A "no" answer means you're only partially Buffered. Even that can be very useful, as it can be equivalent to fully buffered in a subset of categories (Groceries would be a good one if you like to stock up.)

      Like 2
  • dakinemaui said:
    I see we've switched back to the classic Buffer, now. Most people's Buffer is NOT one month of income. (It's a very common misunderstanding.) Yours, for instance, is about $0 because you didn't have to save anything to be able to budget all of next month (having all your income arrive at the end of the month).
    (I'm assuming you don't have any expenses that occur between your check and the end of the month.)

    Ah, that's the confusion, I first used YNAB3 in 2011 so I guess I still use the classical definition of buffer, although I never had one and apparently I don't really need one anyways, since I've been paid monthly since 2003.  By that definition it would be a month of income, which for me is more than a month of expenses, since I'm saving into my Roth IRA (which isn't really an expense and I would stop if I had to in an emergency situation), saving into my emergency fund, and paying extra on debt sometimes, in addition to other true expenses.

    The podcast was an old one, so Jesse was probably using that classic buffer definition.  Mystery solved!

    I actually just turned off age of money AND age of buffering in my Toolkit because I found they weren't that helpful to me.  I'm just going to try to save 6 months of expenses in my E-fund category and keep budgeting monthly the way I have been, but if I were paid bi-weekly, I would probably save a classic buffer and use the INM category the way I hear other people on here do.  I don't want to count my true expenses as part of my age of money or buffering calculation.

    As for expenses between my check and the end of the month,  expenses during that time period annoy me so much.  I'll be paid Friday and the next month is on Monday this week, for example.  In that time period I have a lot of money, but it's all in the budget for the next month and if I spend it now it will mess with my May budget.  Sometimes I just change the date on my transactions to put them in the next month....is that a budgeting sin?  They usually don't hit my account till Monday anyways.

    Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      PhysicsGal I'd say not a budgeting sin, but more of being a pragmatist. :-) The money is already in hand, and it's just busy work to pull it back to the current month's area.

      I do the same thing when my 1st of the month mortgage shifts to the end of the previous month because the 1st is on a weekend. The scheduler enters it for the 1st (I don't import), so I don't really care. There is zero benefit to shifting funds in the budget and editing those transaction dates because my bank's bill-pay service is too stupid to work on weekends.

      Like
  • There's a whole new YNAB video about this topic. The problem is they don't really tell their users how to do it.

    https://youtu.be/gUYd2B5Q8es

    Like
    • Superbone I saw that! If I recall, I wasn't exactly sure if they were using the Classic Buffer or AoM.  Which is genius, because I recall someone saying that the conversation was happening internally at YNAB, and the camps for each side were half and half. 

      Here's what I think the difference is:

      Classic Buffer: only BUDGET money earned in last month. 

      AoM "buffer": only SPEND money earned in last month (aka - 30 days).

      Since this is a budgeting app, only one of those really makes sense. I really liked dakinemaui 's analysis above of specifically why the Classic, Temporal Buffer is more helpful in answering key questions

      I had another thought about that video, but I'm going to have to go watch again and refresh my memory.

      In any case, I think the reason they were nebulous about how to do it in the video is because they're still officially thinking about AoM. Once they're more than half convinced about the CTB, maybe they'll shift the material from a SPENDING focus to a BUDGETING focus, which is easier to handle actionably in the budget...

       

      Off to rewatch!

      Like 2
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Move Light Sound Life 

      Move Light Sound Life said:
      AoM "buffer": only SPEND money earned in last month (aka - 30 days).

       The problem with this point of view is that you can't really control it, because you don't know what your AOM is going to do until after you've spent the money. And because of Rule 2 and the way credit card spending is calculated in, differing income cycles, differing spending cycles,  you can't even make a blanket recommendation of a particular number to keep it from dropping below 30.

      Like
    • Move Light Sound Life That was me, but to clarify, I didn't say half-and-half. I said many folks at YNAB are still big fans of some version of "get a month ahead/live on last month's income"; many are fans of Age of Money (especially as a motivator for new budgeters); and many hold both opinions simultaneously. I couldn't tell you the overall breakdown!

      Like
    • Matthew Sorry! I wasn't trying to misrepresent you!

      Like
    • Move Light Sound Life No worries whatsoever!

      Like 1
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      Matthew Perhaps if the had someone with a background in both Finance and Applied Mathematics review the Age of Money calculation, they'd be less of a fan. Information about where you just were is not helpful in determining where you are now nor in constructing a plan to go from where you are now to where you want to go next.

      To  use a wacky map and compass analogy that is only partially analagous (since in the past I taught Orienteering merit badge at a Boy Scout camp), it'd be like doing a multi day hike through the wilderness and the compass tells you that north is based on the average difference between the previous day's north and direction you were facing throughout the previous day of your hike.  How will that help you orient your map so you know which way north is and make correct decisions about today's leg of the hike?

      Like 2
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule I think the corporate supporters (especially concerning the motivation aspect) are relying on the rampant misunderstanding of new users who think AoM is describing how far ahead they are. I suspect the thinking is, "motivation is motivation". Again, my personal opinion.

      Like 2
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 3 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui You may be right about that, but that's really doing a disservice to the users, effectively allowing them to continue to believe something not based on reality. It's all fine and dandy when it correlates, but when it doesn't and it falls apart as it inevitably does, then what?

      Like 1
  • PhysicsGal said:
    It's fairly easy to move money, but psychologically, it's a barrier that I've crossed that I wouldn't have felt if the money were already sitting in that category.

    This. There would ideally not be any accidental overspending. If enough funds are not available, you should move funds beforehand. If you have to pull funds back from something more important to do that, you'll realize that's out of line with your priorities, and hopefully skip the purchase.

    OP, if you leave these cushions scattered around, you are implicitly saying you value convenience more than growing <whatever> category. If that's really the case, then great -- your budget SHOULD reflect your priorities. If not, then the plan isn't as aligned as it could be. You're the only one who can make this call.

    Like 1
  • Matthew said:
    many are fans of Age of Money (especially as a motivator for new budgeters)

     Is anyone concerned about the fallout when customers feel they've been implicitly lied to? AoM is marketed as a sign of financial security, but, as dakinemaui explored above, it doesn't actually signal financial security reliably. 

    Old money might be present in a healthy budget, but old money might also be present in an unhealthy budget.  When new budgeters become old budgeters and realize that their guideposts were irrelevant, are you just banking on their probable success in following the first 3 rules to keep them? 

    I have been thinking a lot about that last video about getting a month ahead, but I think I'll have to make a new post to share my thoughts next week. I have to prioritize my time elsewhere this week!

    Sneak peek: when you're teaching someone something new, the whole-part-whole approach is quite useful. Since YNAB's 2019 push for an education overhaul, I've seen the whole skipped in favor of an abstract "part" step-by-step (that also seems to try to include the benefits, but only in the abstract). I'd rather point someone towards the destination, tell them why they should go, and trace out possible routes on a map. Leave them with a clear picture of what it will look like when they get there, both so they can recognize it and be motivated along the journey.  I think that's far preferable to putting a blindfold on someone, telling them that their destination is great (not how it's great), and trying to give them step-by-step instructions. "Take 2 steps forward, turn left, well that was too much, turn less left, I mean turn a bit back to the right..." Anyways, if I'm missing the good, new training material, please point me in the right direction. Most things I've seen about getting started are full of happy fluff and no clear direction. I've had to create my own material for my family/friends instead of pointing them to what I learned on (because it's not there). Ok. Rant over. 

    Like 3
  • nolesrule said:
    multi day hike through the wilderness and the compass tells you that north is based on the average difference between the previous day's north and direction you were facing throughout the previous day of your hike

     That's hilarious! I quoted it just so I could like it again!

    Edit: except now I'm not going to like me quoting you, 'cause that's weird. I would double like it if I could.

    Like 2
  • Move Light Sound Life said:
    AoM is marketed as a sign of financial security, but, as dakinemaui explored above, it doesn't actually signal financial security reliably.

    Startup issues notwithstanding, it IS a great indicator of financial INsecurity. The problem is people think "not insecure" equates to "secure". Financial health isn't nearly that simple. If YNAB wants to keep things simple, educating people about "falling behind" vs. "staying even" vs "getting ahead" would be a good start.

    Like 1
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 3 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Herman Touché!

      Like
  • Move Light Sound Life said:
    Sneak peek: when you're teaching someone something new, the whole-part-whole approach is quite useful.

     This was actually how the education materials used to work. Sure, they weren't snazzy high-production value You Tube snippets with cheery people winking from behind a desk, but they said, "Look. You get money. You budget the money according to your priorities. Then you use the budget to guide your spending." They kept coming back to that. 

    It BLOWS MY MIND how many times on FB or reddit I explain that simple concept and people go "Oh my gosh that's the best explanation! Why didn't anybody ever tell me that before?" and I'm left shrugging and going, "I don't know, because that is literally how the company used to explain it." 

    Like 5
Like1 Follow
  • 1 Likes
  • 2 mths agoLast active
  • 52Replies
  • 606Views
  • 16 Following