“I was able to pay the card off several times,” Daniel said. “But I didn’t.”

Linh had only asked a simple question. It was a Friday night at Busboys and Poets, quieter than usual, with love songs playing low enough that no one had to yell. The glass walls were good for people-watching, in case a date turned awkward.

This one hadn’t. They had gone out a couple of times, enough to trade jokes while still finding out who the other person was.

Halfway through the main course, she asked, “What do you bring to a relationship, and what do you need from it?”

“I’m a generous person,” Daniel said. “But that enabled my partner to spend lavishly. When the credit card bill came, for example after a trip, the expenses were… a lot.”

Even telling it, a flicker of anxiety crossed his face.

Linh filled in the rest herself. Daniel had an executive job in tech and drove a BMW. A man like that would have no trouble paying off a credit card.

“Do you not pay off your credit cards?”

That was when he said it.

Linh was confused. She had always made money decisions like an optimizer: what does it cost, and what does it return? She learned it growing up, and school drilled it in. By that math, Daniel’s choice made no sense. The card charged about 22% a year. A savings account paid almost nothing by comparison.

He had the money. He just didn’t use it.

It shook the rule she had lived by. There had to be reasons hiding behind the costs and returns.

*

The closest thing she could compare it to was a train station in Tokyo.

Linh stood with her 10-year-old daughter, Maria, inside what she still considers the biggest, busiest, most complicated train system in the world. Thousands of people moved through it every minute, in perfect order, as if they had rehearsed together like an orchestra. Everybody knew where they were going.

Linh stood still, reading the screens, trying to work out how to buy a ticket and which way to go.

One woman sat in a booth to help the thousands. She spoke a little English and had a minute or two for each person. From her, Linh learned that several companies ran the trains, and you had to buy the ticket for the company running yours. The woman pointed to a ticket machine.

Linh was sure she had misunderstood. She went back to ask again.

Fifteen minutes passed. Maria was stressed too. “We look so weird, just standing here,” she said, in the voice she uses when people stare at her.

With every minute, Linh doubted herself a little more. Maybe she wasn’t smart enough to figure out a simple system in a new place. She caught herself wondering how much she would pay for someone to just get them out of there. Out of the stress. Out of the humiliation. If a scammer had offered to rescue her for $1,000, she would have fallen for it.

Then she took a deep breath, and a kinder thought came. Stay calm. You have time to figure this out. They weren’t rushing to catch anything.

The worst that could happen, she thought, was wasting a $10 ticket and boarding the wrong train. Let’s try. She played with the machine and read everything on the screen. By the third day, Maria said her mom was getting around the trains like a Tokyo local.

*

Fear sets its own price.

Linh’s worst case was a $10 ticket. Her fear was ready to pay $1,000.

That gap is where we overpay. It’s also where fraud lives. A scam call rarely opens with an offer. It opens with a fear: your account is locked, someone you love is in trouble, and you have ten minutes. The scammer isn’t selling anything. He’s selling a way out, and charging whatever the fear says it’s worth.

Daniel’s fear may have set his price, too. He never said why he kept the debt, so Linh can only guess. Maybe his savings feel like safety: proof that he can take care of himself and his kids, that he looks admired in his BMW, that he has made it. Emptying them might feel scarier than paying 22% a year. If so, the interest isn’t a bad trade to him. It’s the price of escaping a fear.

Neither fear is about intelligence, or knowing how money works. Hers, at the station, was of looking weird and stupid. His, she suspects, is of looking like he hasn’t made it.

What matters is how kind we are to ourselves when we doubt we can handle a hard moment. Again and again, we choose between running from an uncomfortable feeling and hanging in there a little longer to see where it leads. We forget that we’re always giving it our best effort.

That effort just needs a bit more time to learn, and a little space to work on its own.

So why do smart, well-paid people like Daniel pay that price? Economists have studied it for decades, and the answers point to a way out.

What the research says

Economists call what Daniel did the credit card debt puzzle. Here is what explains it, and what doesn’t.

Owing $10,000 on a card costs about $2,200 a year

Carrying credit card debt while money sits in savings costs far more than the savings earn. Cards that charge interest now charge about 22% a year on average (22.36%, Federal Reserve, 2026), so owing $10,000 costs about $2,236 a year. The same $10,000 earns $38 in the average savings account, which pays 0.38% (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 2026), or $300 in a high-yield account paying 3%.

Needing cash for rent can explain about half the puzzle

Daniel’s decision is not uncommon. In the Federal Reserve’s 2001 survey of household finances, 27% of US households carried credit card debt from month to month, leaving part of each bill unpaid, while also holding money in checking, savings and investment accounts (Telyukova, 2013). On average, they owed about $5,800 at 14% interest and kept about $7,300 in accounts earning around 1%.

The biggest reason is cash for bills a card can’t pay. Rent, the mortgage, utilities, daycare and emergency repairs usually need cash. Telyukova built a model, a simplified version of how households behave, around that need alone, and it can explain about half of the households in the puzzle (44% to 56%).

That reason is weaker today than it was in 2001. The gap between card and savings rates was about 13 percentage points then and is about 19 to 22 now. And once you pay off a card, the credit comes back for anything a card can pay, so only cash-only bills need savings.

The other half may be about control and feeling safe

Daniel didn’t lack income. What he seemed to be missing was a way to rein in the spending, his partner’s included, and a cushion big enough to always feel safe.

Some economists think carrying card debt can be a way to keep spending in check. Bertaut, Haliassos and Reiter (2009) describe each of us as two people: an accountant who plans and a shopper who spends. Leaving some debt on the card uses up part of the credit limit, which keeps the shopper on a short leash. Telyukova doubts this explains many households, since lowering the credit limit would do the same job more cheaply.

Money in the bank also buys a feeling of safety. Ruberton, Gladstone and Lyubomirsky (2016) matched survey answers from 585 customers of a UK bank with a year of their bank records. People with more in checking and savings were more satisfied with their lives, even compared with people who had the same income, spending and debt, and the link ran through feeling secure. That’s a correlation¹, not proof of cause. Most of the boost came from the first £1,000, which mattered about three times as much as the next £9,000.

Daniel’s savings may be buying a real feeling. At 22%, it’s an expensive one.

Fear makes quick money decisions costly

Our money lives are built from many small decisions that pass quickly. Linh made hers after a deep breath, and it risked $10. Each month the card bill arrives, Daniel makes his again, and each one costs 22%. Think of the moment you sign for a house, or the second you decide whether to answer a strange text.

Calm helps us decide better, and strong emotions make us easier to fool. Kircanski et al. (2018) split adults into groups at random, like flipping a coin for each person, so the groups differed only in what the researchers did to them. That’s the strongest way to show cause and effect. People who were made excited or angry were more willing to buy from misleading ads than people who were kept calm.

Scams are built for those moments. Americans reported losing $15.9 billion to fraud in 2025 (Federal Trade Commission, 2026). Reported losses to scams that started with a text message were five times higher in 2024 than in 2020 (Federal Trade Commission, 2025). Many start as a friendly “wrong number” text that turns into a romance, then an investment pitch. Others are fake fraud alerts about your bank. They work on loneliness and fear, not on what we know.

Starting small makes the first step easier

Most people who carry card debt want it gone, and the hardest part is the first step. No study tests exactly “pay $100 extra and raise it later,” but research on starting small points the same way.

Starting small and stepping up has worked for saving. In the Save More Tomorrow program, workers at one US company who had turned down advice to save more right away agreed instead to save a little more with each future raise (Thaler and Benartzi, 2004). Of those offered the plan, 78% joined, and their average saving rate rose from 3.5% to 13.6% of pay over 40 months. It was one company, and workers chose whether to join, so it isn’t a coin-flip experiment.

Paying off one whole debt, even a small one, seems to help people keep going. Gal and McShane (2012) studied nearly 6,000 clients of a US debt-settlement company, most of whom owed money on several accounts. Clients who paid off more of those accounts completely were more likely to finish paying off all their debt, a pattern rather than proof. What mattered was how many accounts reached zero, not how many dollars they had paid.

There is a hidden trade-off, however. In lab games, Amar et al. (2011) found that people kept paying off their smallest debts first, even when a bigger debt charged more interest, and they ended up owing more. Say you have a $500 card at 15% and a $5,000 card at 25%: clearing the small one feels good, but the big one keeps growing faster. If your cards charge similar rates, start with the smallest; if one charges much more, put extra money there first.

Choosing once isn’t enough; the amount has to keep rising. In a coin-flip experiment with about 40,000 new credit cards in the UK, a lender stopped offering “pay the minimum” as the ready-made option for automatic payments (Guttman-Kenney et al., 2025). Far fewer people chose the minimum, but most set an amount just above it, and seven months later they owed no less. A small step only helps if you keep stepping up.

Linh’s question is a good place to start: what’s the worst that could happen? If you paid more on the card, the realistic worst case might be a smaller cushion, or feeling a little less like you’ve made it. For Linh, it was a $10 ticket. No study, and no expert, can tell you which reason is yours. Only noticing can.

Know & Do

Know: Every money choice is also a trade of feelings, and fear can make us pay far more than the choice is worth.

Do: When you’re calm, ask what you’re trying to achieve, what your options are, and what each would cost you in money, in feelings and in what it could teach you. Then start small, and hang on a little longer each day: the first step is the hardest, and it gets lighter.

Disclaimer: I’m an economist, not a licensed financial planner. I dig through the research to understand what we know and what we don’t, and I look for studies that hold up. This is information to help you think it through, not advice for your situation.

Got a money question you’ve been holding? Leave it in the comments, and I may research it for a future piece.

If this resonated, a like or a restack helps the next person find it.

¹ A note on the research: I look for independent, high-quality studies, mostly from peer-reviewed journals, government and Federal Reserve researchers, and established research institutions. When the evidence points in different directions, I show you more than one side. Not every study can prove cause and effect. Some find a strong pattern, or correlation, and can’t rule out every other explanation. When a study shows correlation, I say so in the text. Every study is linked, so you can read it yourself.

Tam was halfway through dinner when the food stopped going down. It stuck somewhere in her throat, as if her body had decided, without asking her, that the meal was over. She felt the blood rise to her face. Then one tear came, and after the first one she couldn’t stop the rest.

Across the table, her husband had asked a question. “What did you spend more than $500 at Costco for?” He had checked the bank app before dinner and was too panicked not to ask. He asked it the way a prosecutor asks a question he already knows the answer to: eyes fixed on her, brow down, voice somewhere between disbelief and accusation. He was not going to let it go.

Their daughter was five. She had seen this enough times to have a routine for it. She left her plate, went upstairs to her room, closed the door and pressed her hands over her ears.

About $300 of the $500 was a Roomba. Tam had told him about the Roomba that morning, on her way out the door. He had been half asleep, and whatever he said had sounded like yes. Now she reminded him. It reached him not as information but as an excuse, the kind a person makes when she has been caught. He looked at his crying wife the way you’d look at a shoplifter who has started to plead.

Neither of them was arguing about a Roomba.

Tam cooked every day. Food was how her parents had shown love, and it was how she showed it. She also ran the household: the child, the groceries, the cooking, the cleaning and, after her own workday, the lawn and the snow. Cooking at home was already the cheapest way to feed a family. Her husband had never done the family’s grocery shopping, so he had no idea what groceries cost. She had told him many times that when he picked at the grocery bill, she heard an insult. Six years in, she felt unheard.

He was flooded too. For a while he had felt control slipping away: of the house, of his wife, of his place as the breadwinner, and of whatever he had been taught a man was supposed to be. To him, food was fuel, measured in calories and dollars. He didn’t eat fish or seafood, so salmon on the receipt meant his money paying for a meal he would never eat. When someone else spent his dollar, he panicked.

If you handed their two portfolios to a financial planner with the names removed, she would see two different people.

His: a 401(k) he had paid into every year since his first job, a house he bought before they met because he saw an investment, and the rest in a brokerage account. Money meant to grow, and money meant to stay.

Hers: no 401(k), a Roth IRA (individual retirement account) opened a couple of years ago, and most of her savings in a high-yield savings account, in case she ever had to move back to her home country. For her, money meant to live and to feel safe.

They had a system, and like a lot of systems it worked until it didn’t. When they married, Tam asked what debt he had and offered to pay off his student loan, because she wanted their financial life to be better together. The gesture got him to agree to a joint account. Each of them topped it up every two weeks or every month from their own accounts, and it paid the mortgage, the childcare and the groceries. Beyond that, she didn’t know how much he had, and he didn’t know how much she had. He was comfortable that way. She didn’t ask.

In six years they talked about money but never once about what it meant. Every money conversation was a transaction: this bill, that transfer, this purchase. Nobody asked the other why they wanted the money.

That dinner-table question turned out to be the start of a costly divorce and shared custody of their daughter.

So did one Costco run end a marriage? Almost certainly not by itself. But it raises questions anyone who shares money with another person, or once did, or someday will, might ask. Why does a fight over a purchase feel so personal? Does marriage make you richer and happier? What does a breakup really cost? And should two people who earn well keep their money separate?

What the research says

Why does a fight over a purchase feel so personal?

Because money fights are rarely about the money.

Papp, Cummings and Goeke-Morey (2009) asked 100 married couples to keep a diary of their arguments at home, 748 in all. Money was not what couples argued about most often. But money fights hurt more, came back more often and were more likely to end unresolved, even though couples tried harder to solve them.

Dew, Britt and Huston (2012) followed 4,574 American couples over several years. Of everything couples disagreed about, money was the topic that best predicted a later divorce. How much money a couple had did not predict divorce once those arguments were counted.

So what are couples really fighting about? Peetz and Joseph (2024) asked people why they want money. In surveys of more than 600 married people and 118 couples, wanting money for freedom, pride or time to enjoy life went with happier relationships. Wanting it to feel superior, quiet self-doubt or spend on impulse went with less happy ones. And partners who believed they wanted money for similar reasons were happier together.

LeBaron-Black et al. (2025) found a similar pattern in 1,153 married American couples. Couples who talked well about money were more satisfied with their marriages, even after accounting for income, and couples whose deep-seated beliefs about money were similar talked about it better. Both studies are snapshots, so they show a link, not proof.

Tam spent on food because food was how her family showed love. Her husband counted calories and dollars because every dollar spent felt like control slipping away.

They weren’t fighting about $500. They were fighting about two different reasons for wanting money.

In six years neither had said theirs out loud.

Does marriage make you richer and happier?

A little of both, but less than it looks.

Zissimopoulos, Karney and Rauer (2008) compared Americans in their early 50s by marriage history. People married to the same person all along had the most wealth, more than three times as much as people who divorced and didn’t remarry. People who remarried landed in between, and people who never married had the least.

Compare people with similar earnings, education and number of children, and much of the gap closes. People who remarried after one divorce had about the same wealth as those who never split. Single men held about as much per person as married men. The wealth gap stayed for women who remained single after a divorce or a spouse’s death. The authors point to two likely reasons: two people sharing one home and one set of bills, and mothers who usually raise the children after a divorce, often on support that doesn’t cover the cost.

Few of us marry for money anymore. We marry to be happy. So does it work?

Only a little. Stutzer and Frey (2006) followed about 15,000 Germans for 17 years. Married people were a little happier than singles, but the people who later married were already happier while they were single. Happier people are more likely to marry, so marriage gets more credit than it earns.

What matters more is the marriage itself. People in unhappy marriages were less happy than people who weren’t married at all (Chapman and Guven, 2016). And the happiness boost from marriage was about twice as large when a spouse was also a best friend (Grover and Helliwell, 2019).

What does a breakup really cost, and who pays?

More than the lawyers, and it starts long before anyone files.

Zagorsky (2005) followed about 9,000 Americans. Their wealth began falling about four years before the divorce and ended up 77% lower on average. Women pay more. Women’s household income fell 41% after divorce, nearly twice the drop men saw (US Government Accountability Office, 2012), and for American women it showed no sign of recovering in the years that followed (de Vaus et al., 2015).

The unhappiness comes early too. Clark and Georgellis (2012) found that people in Britain were least satisfied one to two years before their divorce, and happier after it than in the years leading up to it.

Then there is the cost no balance sheet shows. Reviewing 169 studies, van Eldik et al. (2020) found that children who often see hostile, unresolved fights between their parents have more behavior and emotional problems, and those problems tend to last. Tam’s daughter, escaping with her hands over her ears, was paying long before anyone filed.

Should two people who earn well keep their money separate?

Many do. The research suggests sharing more of the money helps.

The best evidence here comes from an experiment. Olson et al. (2023) randomly assigned 230 engaged and newlywed couples to merge into one joint account, keep separate accounts, or do whatever they liked. Left to choose, 72% kept their money separate. Two years later, couples with a joint account remained as satisfied with their relationship as when they started, and the couples keeping money separate had become less satisfied.

Tam and her husband were close to that last group: one joint account for the bills, everything else separate. When all the money is shared, nobody needs to keep score. The researchers add one caution: merging means giving up some independence, and it may carry risks for couples already on shaky ground.

Gladstone, Garbinsky and Mogilner (2022), in six studies of more than 38,000 people, found the same pattern: couples who pool all their money are more satisfied than couples who pool some or none. The benefit was largest for couples with less money or more financial strain.

How a money talk starts matters as much as where the money sits. Gottman et al. (1998) videotaped 130 newlywed couples and followed them for six years. Four habits predicted divorce: criticism, defensiveness, contempt and stonewalling, or shutting down. What predicted lasting, happy marriages was a gentle start to hard conversations, and a husband willing to accept his wife’s influence and share power in decisions.

Put together, the research points to four steps:

• Start gently. “What did you spend more than $500 at Costco for?” is a verdict. “I saw the Costco charge and felt anxious. Can we look at it together?” is an opening. (My example, built on Gottman’s finding.)

• Ask, “Is this actually about the money?” When a money talk keeps going badly, LeBaron-Black suggests asking this, because the real gap is often in the values and habits underneath (BYU News).

• Start with one purchase and explain why. Peetz suggests talking through your reasons for a specific money decision, then widening it to what money means to each of you, and coming back to it over time (Psyche).

• Share more than the bills. If you pool only the mortgage and groceries, talk about pooling more, or at least about one shared goal you both fund.

Know & Do

Disclaimer: I’m an economist, not a licensed financial planner or relationship counselor. I dig through the research to understand what we know and what we don’t, and I look for studies that hold up. This is information to help you think it through, not advice for your situation.

If this resonated, a like or a restack helps the next person find it.

The Coinman and I each answered the same question in our own words: What did your first job teach you about money?

The Coinman spent 40 years in finance, from lending and risk management to closing failed banks. His first job was in a relocation company’s accounting office. Mine was in a university cafeteria kitchen. We grew up on opposite sides of the world and started working in very different times.

Neither job made us rich. But each gave us a way of seeing money that we still use today. His is about being prepared. Mine is about freedom. Our stories come first. Then I’ll share what research says about why those early lessons last. If you’re watching a son or daughter start out today, it also shows what makes that start harder now, and how you can help.

The Coinman: A Relocation Office

My first job was as a real estate accountant for a company that handled corporate and government relocations. When an employer needed to move someone across the country, we managed the money side of it: selling the old house, helping buy the new one, and everything in between.

I thought I was taking an accounting job. What I got was a front-row seat to how money really works for families.

Lesson One: A Dollar Isn’t Worth the Same Everywhere

Early on, the company transferred me from Connecticut to Dallas, Texas.

At the time, home prices in Dallas were about a third of what they were in Connecticut. The money that bought a modest house in Connecticut could buy something much bigger in Dallas, or the same house with plenty left over.

That taught me something I’ve never forgotten: the cost of living isn’t the same in every part of the country. A salary isn’t just a number. It’s a number in a place. The same paycheck that feels tight in one city can feel comfortable in another.

Every relocation file I worked on proved it. Home values differed by region, by city, and sometimes by neighborhood. Two families with identical incomes could live completely different financial lives depending on where their employer sent them.

Lesson Two: The Move Revealed Who Was Ready

The bigger lesson came from the employees themselves.

On paper, everyone being transferred was in the same position. Their company asked them to move, and their company helped with the move. But the transitions were nothing alike.

Employees who had saved and were doing well financially had an easier time. They could qualify for a mortgage in the new city. They had cash to handle the gaps and surprises that come with any move. For them, relocation was an opportunity.

Employees carrying debt and bad credit scores had a much harder time relocating and buying a house. Steps that were routine for the savers became hurdles for them. Same company, same move, same help. Completely different experience.

I saw that pattern over and over.

The relocation didn’t create anyone’s financial situation. It exposed it.

What I Carried Forward

That first job shaped how I’ve thought about money ever since:

• Where you live is a financial decision. Before you chase a raise or accept a move, compare the cost of living, not just the salary.

• Opportunity favors the prepared. Promotions and transfers often come with little warning. The people who can say yes are the ones whose finances are already in order.

• Your credit score is a door. Good credit opened doors for the employees I worked with. Bad credit closed them at exactly the wrong moment.

• Savings buy you options. Not just security. Choices.

I went on to spend 40 years in finance, in risk management, lending, and closing failed banks at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). But some of my most important lessons came from that first job, watching families pack up their lives and start over somewhere new.

The move didn’t decide who would struggle. Their preparation did.

— Story by 💰

Vy: A Cafeteria in Arkansas

I got my first job when I came to the United States for college. My parents grew up with war in front of their houses, governments changing overnight, and an economy that left the whole country poor. So they worked their whole lives to give their children a chance to live somewhere safer and more stable. I’m the oldest of four and had the honor of going first. When the UK consulate denied me a student visa, they tried New Zealand. Back in 1999 and 2000, it was difficult for Vietnamese people to get a visa to a developed country, and the United States was supposed to be the hardest of all. Then my mom met a lady who ran a program helping Vietnamese students go to the University of Arkansas. I had no idea where Arkansas was on the map. I was just about to turn 18, and when the consulate interviewers congratulated me on my visa, I jumped in excitement. I’ve always loved freedom, and at that age, freedom meant being away from my parents and breaking all the rules they set.

After three flights and perhaps 30 hours, I landed on a different planet. I come from the biggest city in Vietnam, where people and noise are part of daily life. Arkansas had too much space and too few humans. When the assistant who picked me up said there were about 20 other Vietnamese students at the university, I breathed a sigh of relief.

Lesson One: Money Is Hard to Earn

A few weeks later, I asked those Vietnamese friends how to get a job. To me, a job meant more freedom: money I could spend however I wanted. I wasn’t thinking much about how hard my parents worked to pay my tuition, roughly 20 times the average salary in Vietnam, and my living costs. My friends pointed me to the university cafeteria, and I started the next day at $7.25 an hour. I was thrilled. With five or six other Vietnamese students, I helped the two cooks who ran the whole cafeteria, chopping vegetables, serving food, mopping floors, and washing dishes for hundreds of students. When the excitement waned and my 18-year-old body ached from hours on my feet, I started to see how hard it is to make money. My first paycheck was even less than the $7.25 an hour I was promised, because of taxes, a concept I had never known. It paid for groceries and a few meals out each month.

What I Carried Forward

Money was hard to earn, but that first job taught me how to be useful, and that money wasn’t the end goal. It was just my path to freedom. It also taught me how hard my parents worked to buy me that freedom. It took me years to figure out why I was there and how I ended up where I am now. I know I wouldn’t be here without that first job.

— Story by

What the Research Says

A First Job Shapes More Than a Paycheck

The cleanest test of what a first job does comes from New York City, which gives out minimum-wage summer jobs to 14- to 21-year-olds by lottery. Because winners and losers are picked like a coin flip, any difference later is caused by the job itself. Gelber, Isen, and Kessler (2016) followed about 294,000 applicants. The summer job didn’t raise later earnings. But winners were 10% less likely to be incarcerated and 18% less likely to die during the study period, which the researchers link mainly to fewer homicides. A first job may not change the paycheck but may change the life path.

Timing matters too, for both our paychecks and our outlook. Oreopoulos, von Wachter, and Heisz (2012) found that Canadian graduates who started in a recession earned about 9% less in their first year and needed about ten years to catch up. The pay gap closes. The mindset may not. Malmendier and Nagel (2011) found that people who lived through poor stock returns in their twenties took less financial risk and were less likely to own stocks decades later than people who lived through a boom. That one is a correlation, but a careful one.1 When we start out shapes how we see money. The Coinman learned to see money as readiness. I learned to see it as freedom.

Why Starting Out Feels Harder Today

Many parents tell me it’s harder for their grown children to reach the middle class than it was for them. Some blame artificial intelligence (AI). The honest answer?

Take the long view first. Chetty et al. (2017) found that 92% of Americans born in 1940 out-earned their parents, after inflation. For those born in 1980, it was 50%. The main cause wasn’t slower growth. It was that more of the gains went to the top.

AI is a newer drag. Using payroll records for millions of U.S. workers, Brynjolfsson, Chandar, and Chen (2025) found that since late 2022, 22- to 25-year-olds have lost ground in jobs AI can largely do, such as software development and customer service. Young software developers’ employment fell almost 20% from its peak, while older workers in those jobs held steady. In jobs AI can’t easily do, like home health aides, young workers’ employment grew. The authors note this pattern fits AI as a cause but doesn’t prove it.

Dodini and Smith (2026) at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas saw the same among Texas public university graduates. Since ChatGPT arrived, those from majors whose tasks AI can more easily do have been less likely to find a job in Texas within a year, and earned about 5% less when they did.

But AI isn’t the whole story. Gould and Fast (2026) at the Economic Policy Institute found unemployment rising about equally for young graduates and for young workers without a degree, even though graduates are far more exposed to AI. That points to weak hiring for young people overall.

How Parents Can Help: A Place to Land and a Door to Open

The Coinman wrote that savings buy you options. For young adults, parents are often the option. Kaplan (2012) followed young American men without a college degree. Those who lost a job at 20 and didn’t move home earned about 25% less at 26 than peers who never lost one. Those who moved home caught up almost completely. A place to land let them wait for a better job instead of grabbing the first one. It’s a correlation, but one backed by an economic model of the choice.

Connections matter too. Kramarz and Skans (2014) found that about 1 in 10 Swedish graduates got their first job where a parent worked. They found it about half a year sooner than their classmates, started at slightly lower pay, caught up within about three years, and were more likely to still be employed three years later. The boost was biggest for less-educated graduates and in years of high unemployment, when doors are hardest to open alone. The authors call these associations rather than proven causes.

Both studies match my story. My parents paid my living costs while I studied and worked, and my Vietnamese friends opened the cafeteria door. My $7.25 an hour bought groceries. My parents’ support bought me time to learn, to be useful, and eventually to choose my work.

Know & Do

If your grown child is struggling to get started, it’s likely more about timing and an economy that shares its gains unevenly than about effort. You can help with a place to live, which buys them time to find the right job, and an introduction, which may help more than a check.

Got a money question you’ve been holding? Leave it in the comments, and I may research it for a future piece. You can also ask anonymously here.

If this resonated, a like or a restack helps the next person find it.

Want more?

Why didn’t your college degree get you rich? I did everything my parents asked, all the way to a PhD, and I’m still not rich. I reviewed 84 studies: a degree raises your pay, but habits decide your wealth.

Is the $40 trillion national debt coming for your retirement? My roommate wanted to escape it. Then she realized her retirement is loaned straight into it — and here’s what it really means for your money.

The water bill was on the kitchen counter, a foot from the trash can.

I had printed it that afternoon and taped it to the fridge: $200 for one month of water, or so I thought. I’m conflict avoidant, so that was my whole plan. Everyone would see it and quietly take shorter showers. When I came down to say hi to my 12-year-old after school, the bill was off the fridge and on its way out.

Oh boy, was I angry. To me it felt like my stress didn’t matter to her. To her, it felt like she was blamed for something she couldn’t fix. We both sat in anxiety for a whole evening. We said things that hurt. She cried. I went to bed angry, then felt bad that I had made her cry. The water bill wasn’t just a water bill. It was a tired mother at the end of a long day, carrying feelings nobody had room to hear.

Later, I looked closer. The bill covered two months, not one. The water company had sent both at once.

Earlier that day I had read a stranger’s story, and I couldn’t look away. shared a reader’s dilemma in Boring Money Talk #4.

The reader goes by “Subsinking.” Subsinking is 44, lives in an expensive US city, and last fall walked away from a stable corporate content job paying about $95,000 to write a Substack newsletter full time. The newsletter now brings in about $120 a month, mostly from friends and family. Fixed costs run $3,400 a month. The emergency fund has fallen from $35,000 to under $10,000. There’s a two-month deadline to decide whether to keep going, and underneath it all, a fear that at 44, ageism will make the road back to a corporate job hard.

One line stayed with me:

“Enough” used to mean creative freedom, but at this exact moment, it looks like a boring, predictable corporate paycheck that covers my mortgage without giving me a panic attack every time I log into my banking app.

I’m also 44, also in an expensive US city, also left my job, also writing on Substack, also burning savings to get by. I left Subsinking a comment, as if talking to my future self: “Look on the bright side, your Substack is paying you $120/month, more than my $0/month. :)” Different numbers, slightly different timeline. It felt like reading my own post from six months from now.

Anxiety is contagious. That’s how a water bill ends up next to the trash.

All three of Dan’s guest writers gave Subsinking the same advice: get a paycheck back and keep the newsletter going on the side. So I did what I know how to do. I went to the research to see who actually succeeds, what it costs and pays, and what is in our control.

Who actually succeeds?

Mark Zuckerberg started Facebook in his Harvard dorm at 19. Elon Musk co-founded Zip2 at 24 and sold it four years later for $307 million (Britannica). Those stories sell the dream of quitting young. But famous founders are the few who made it, so their stories can’t tell us the odds. For the odds, we need everyone who tried.

Using U.S. Census Bureau records on growth-oriented startups, Azoulay, Jones, Kim and Miranda (2020) found that the average founder of the fastest-growing 1 in 1,000 new firms was 45 years old. Founders with experience in the same industry were much more likely to succeed. Zuckerberg is the exception in this data. Someone in their mid-40s with years in their field is close to the typical profile of success.

Earlier attempts count too. Following every new retail business opened in Texas from 1990 to 2011, Lafontaine and Shaw (2016) found that owners who had run a business before kept their next one open longer. Comparing the same owners across businesses, they conclude that people learn by doing. Venture-backed founders whose last company succeeded had a 34% chance the next would go public, against 22% for first-timers (Gompers, Kovner, Lerner and Scharfstein 2010).

Then there’s the question of who leaves a paycheck in the first place. I once heard psychiatrist Daniel Amen say on Jay Shetty’s podcast that “people who have ADD are often executives of their own companies because they don’t work well often with other people,” and he pointed to JetBlue’s founder as an example (On Purpose with Jay Shetty, 2025). Research backs part of that. Among 7,208 Swedish twins, people with more ADHD symptoms, especially hyperactivity, were more likely to be self-employed, and the hyperactivity link showed up again among 13,112 Dutch students (Verheul and coauthors 2016). It’s an association, not a cause.

I smiled and said to myself, “That’s me.” It’s hard for me to follow the same routine, day in and day out, being told what to do for years. That doesn’t mean something is wrong with me.

Subscribe now

What does it cost, and what does it pay?

Start with time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks every new business location in the country. Of those that opened in 2014, 80% were still open after one year, 51% after five years and 35% after ten (BLS Business Employment Dynamics).

Then money. Here the economist in me needs you to look at two different numbers: the average and the typical.

Using national survey data from the 1980s, Hamilton (2000) found that the typical (median) person who stayed in business for ten years earned 35% less than they would have in a paid job. They stayed anyway, which he attributes to the non-money benefits of being your own boss.

A newer study by Bhandari, Kass, May, McGrattan and Schulz (2024) used IRS and Social Security records to measure what owners actually take home. By age 55, self-employed people earned about $134,000 a year on average, against $79,000 for similar employees. But 57% of them earned less than comparable employees, and that majority shared only 16% of all self-employment income.

Substack has the same shape, only steeper. No independent study measures what Substack writers earn, so these are company and analyst figures. About 50,000 writers earn anything at all (TheWrap), out of what one statistics site puts at more than 2 million publications (Bestwriting). That's about 1 in 40, as a rough guess. At the top, more than 50 writers earn over $1 million a year (The Blog Herald), about one of every nine dollars of the roughly $450 million writers earn (Sacra).

After Substack's 10% and Stripe's card fees (Substack), Subsinking's $120 is about $100 in the bank.

Now the cost people fear most: failing. Following about 12,000 Americans for three decades, Manso (2016) found that more than half of business ventures lasted less than two years. But people who tried a business and went back to a paid job earned about as much over their lifetimes as people who never left. Counting everyone who tried, entrepreneurs earned about 10% more over a lifetime.

What’s in your control?

The research can’t change the odds for everyone. But it does show what moved the odds for the people who tried.

People who kept a paycheck failed less often. Raffiee and Feng (2014) followed more than 5,000 Americans who started businesses over about 15 years. Those who kept their day job at first were 33% less likely to fail than those who quit to go full time. The study compares people rather than proving cause; full-time founders also scored higher on risk tolerance and self-confidence. Sara Blakely started Spanx at 29 with $5,000 saved from selling fax machines, and she kept selling them while she researched fabrics and patents at night (Fortune).

A cushion brought more people in, and they did just as well. Jeff Bezos left a hedge-fund job at 30 to start Amazon, and his parents invested $245,573 after he told them there was a 70% chance they’d lose it (Bloomberg, via AOL). Most of us don’t have those parents, which is why a natural experiment in France matters. In 2002, France let unemployed people keep their unemployment benefits while starting a business. More people started firms, the new founders were as educated and ambitious as before, and their firms were just as likely to survive and hire (Hombert, Schoar, Sraer and Thesmar 2020). Because the rule changed for some people and not others, this is causal evidence: when the downside was cushioned, more people tried, and they did about as well.

Learning to act without being told what to do raised profits by 30%. In Togo, 1,500 small-business owners were randomly assigned to standard business training, to “personal initiative” training, or to none. Initiative training taught people to act without being told, plan ahead for problems and keep going after setbacks. Standard business training produced no significant gain (Campos, Frese, Goldstein and coauthors 2017).

Founders taught to test their ideas earned more. About 100 Italian startups were randomly taught a “scientific” approach: state a theory about your customers, test it, judge the results honestly. They earned more revenue and were quicker to switch ideas when the evidence said so (Camuffo, Cordova, Gambardella and Spina 2020).

Founders with experienced advisers grew more. At a startup bootcamp in India, more than 100 tech founders were randomly paired with peers who gave advice. Founders advised by people who ran their own businesses with structured practices grew their teams more over the next two years and were more likely to survive (Chatterji, Delecourt, Hasan and Koning 2019).

So what about Subsinking, and me?

Put together, the research lines up with what Dan’s guest writers said, and it speaks to the fears too. Forty-four isn’t late. People who kept a paycheck while they built failed less often. The typical self-employed person earns less than a job pays, so a newsletter asked to cover a $3,400 month from the start is up against the odds. And going back to a job isn’t the end of the story.

The research can’t tell Subsinking what to do. Only Subsinking knows the full picture. But $120 a month in the first year is where most people are, not proof of failure.

Anxiety is what put the bill on the fridge. It’s also what sent me to the research. The feeling isn’t the enemy. It’s a signal to look at the numbers, gently, and maybe not at the end of a long day.

“Enough,” I’m learning, is really two numbers. One pays the mortgage and the water bill. The other lets you look your daughter in the eye after she takes the bill off the fridge.

KNOW & DO

Know: Most people who start a business earn less than a job would pay while a few earn far more, and going back to a job after trying costs less over a lifetime than people fear.

Do: Treat your project like an experiment: test one belief about your readers or customers this month, ask someone who has done it, and change course when the evidence says so.

If this resonated, please subscribe and share to keep me writing. A like or a restack helps the next person find it.

Subscribe now

If you’ve left a paycheck to build something, what told you it was working, or that it was time to change course? Reply and tell me — I read every one.

We were in the kitchen making dinner when my mother asked about my daughter, who had just wandered out of the room. “How is Maria doing in school? Is she getting all A’s in math and science?”

“She’s struggling,” I said. “We just moved to a new neighborhood, and she just started sixth grade. She’s going through a lot of changes.”

My mother’s face fell. “Chết rồi,” she said. Literally, “dead already.” It’s what Vietnamese people say when something has gone badly wrong.

My mother is deeply afraid of poverty, the thing she worked so hard to escape, and in her world only education gets you out. Not just any education: math and science.

It isn’t a foolish belief. In the Vietnam my parents survived, money could be wiped out overnight. As I wrote in “$200 for a chunk of beef,” in 1985 the government reissued the currency and let people trade only a sliver of their old money for the new. What no one could take from you was what was in your head.

I knew her belief by heart, because math, physics and chemistry were the only grades my parents ever looked at on my report card. Those three had to be at the top. Nothing else mattered. They paid for a private school to keep it that way.

I still remember my fifth-grade classroom. After every quiz, most of us, me included, lined up to lie on a wooden table at the front of the room. Five strokes for each wrong multiplication or division problem, ten for each wrong addition or subtraction. On a lucky day, the teacher used a wooden stick. Some days, a belt.

That’s what my parents paid that school for, because they were afraid I’d grow up poor.

For the first 22 years of my life, I had one job: “Get good grades and a higher degree.” My parents’ biggest investment was my sisters and me; most of their savings went into our schooling. I did my part. I went all the way to a PhD. There is no higher degree to get.

And I’m still not wealthy.

If you grew up in an Asian family, or in any family that believed in school the way mine did, you know the deal we were offered: study hard, and the rest will take care of itself. So I went looking for whether the deal was true. What actually creates wealth?

For once, my PhD came in handy. There’s an old joke about how economists think.

A physicist, a chemist and an economist are stranded on an island with a can of food and nothing to open it. The physicist says to heat it until the lid bursts. The chemist says to let seawater eat through it. The economist says, “Assume we can open the can.”

I laughed hard the first time I heard it, because that’s exactly how I was trained. To study one thing, we assume everything else away: same family, same luck, same personality. All else equal.

Real life never holds all else equal. But once in a while, life shuffles people at random, through an adoption, a lottery ticket or a new rule at work, and economists get their all-else-equal for real. I reviewed 84 studies1 looking for those moments. Here's what they say.

What a degree buys, and what it doesn’t

Start with the deal I was raised on, and a lesson I knew on paper long before I felt it: wealth isn’t what you earn. It’s what you own minus what you owe. A paycheck only becomes wealth if some of it stays.

School does raise the paycheck. Florida students who finished high school between the late 1990s and 2002 with grades right at the admission cutoff for Florida International University earned 22% more eight to fourteen years later if they got in than if they just missed it, though nearly all of that gain went to men and lower-income students (Zimmerman 2014).

But the wealth that comes with a degree has been shrinking. Federal Reserve surveys of American families from 1989 to 2016 show that among white families born in the 1940s, college graduates held nearly three times the wealth of non-graduates. Among those born in the 1980s, they held about one and a half times as much. For non-white graduates born in the 1980s, there was no measurable wealth advantage at all (Emmons, Kent and Ricketts 2019). Those younger graduates are still early in their lives, so the gap may widen. Still, it’s not the deal I was promised.

What families pass down

Here’s what makes wealth so hard to study. When rich parents raise rich children, three things travel down the family line at once: the money, the genes and the upbringing, meaning the habits, the dinner-table talk and the way a household treats a dollar.

They arrive tangled together, so no one can tell which one did the work. Is a knack for money something you’re born with, or something you pick up at the dinner table?

Adoption untangles one thread. An adopted child gets their genes from one family and their upbringing from another. In Sweden, economists followed about 2,600 people born between 1950 and 1970 who were adopted as children, and compared them with both sets of parents. Black, Devereux, Lundborg and Majlesi (2020) found that the adoptees’ wealth tracked the wealth of the parents who raised them far more closely than that of the parents who gave birth to them, even before any inheritance arrived. How much they saved and how they invested looked learned, not born.

In Norway, Korean children born between 1965 and 1986 were placed with families in the order the families’ applications arrived, not by who the parents were. Fagereng, Mogstad and Rønning (2021) found that by their mid-30s, those raised in wealthier homes had grown up wealthier, partly because their parents gave them money along the way.

Genes aren’t nothing. In a study of nearly 15,000 Swedish twins whose savings were tracked from 2002 to 2006, Cronqvist and Siegel (2015) put genes at about a third of the differences in how much people save. That still leaves two-thirds that isn’t in our DNA.

Easy come, easy go

Windfalls are another accident economists can study. Among Florida lottery winners from 1993 to 2002, Hankins, Hoekstra and Skiba (2011) found that a big prize, $50,000 to $150,000, didn’t rescue people who were already heading toward bankruptcy. It only delayed it.

An inheritance works a lot like a lottery ticket you never bought. In Sweden, Nekoei and Seim (2023) followed Swedes who inherited from a parent between 1999 and 2015. Those inheritances, usually small, were mostly gone within a decade.

The setup beats the willpower

So what explains who ends up with more? Here is the finding that stopped me. Venti and Wise (2000) studied about 4,000 American households whose heads were 51 to 61 years old in 1992, close to retirement. They had each household’s Social Security earnings records from its whole working life, so they could group together people who had earned about the same. Then they looked at how much each household had built up.

You might expect people who earned the same to end up with about the same. They didn’t. Some high earners had almost nothing saved. Some low earners had saved a lot.

The researchers checked the usual explanations: an illness, an inheritance, a divorce, picking the wrong investments. Together, those explained only a small part of the difference. Most of the rest came down to one thing: how much of each paycheck a household kept instead of spent.

“Kept” isn’t always a free choice. Money sent home to family every month, or a job with no retirement plan, would look the same in their numbers. But a study from Denmark found something hopeful: you don’t need more willpower. You need a better setup.

Denmark tracks almost everyone’s savings, from bank accounts to retirement accounts, through its tax records. That let Chetty, Friedman, Leth-Petersen, Nielsen and Olsen (2014) follow about 4 million Danes from 1995 to 2009 and watch what happened when they changed jobs. Some new employers automatically put more of each paycheck into a retirement account; others put in less. Workers didn’t choose this. It came with the job.

When the new job saved more for them, most people simply let it. They didn’t cut back on their other savings to make up for it, so their total savings went up. About 85 out of every 100 people save this way: whatever is set up for them, they leave alone.

The other 15 or so are careful planners. When the government offered tax breaks for saving, the planners mostly moved money they already had into the tax-favored account. The tax break changed where their money sat, not how much they saved.

Ronald Read pumped gas and fixed cars in Vermont for about 25 years, then worked as a janitor at J.C. Penney. He held his winter coat together with a safety pin. When he died in 2014, at 92, he left almost $8 million.

Most of it was in dividend stocks (shares in companies that pay out part of their profits) that he had bought and simply held for decades (Ritholtz 2015; Associated Press 2015). One man isn’t a study. But he is what the studies look like in a single life.

What I’ll tell my daughter

My parents were right that school would raise my paycheck. In the Vietnam they survived, what was in your head was the only wealth that couldn’t vanish. Here, it’s only half the story.

A paycheck is not wealth. Wealth is what stays, and what stays depends less on how high you climb in school than on the habits and the setup you build along the way. Those are mostly learned, which means they can be learned at 25, or at 45.

So what will I tell my daughter? Grades still matter. But the lesson I most want her to carry isn’t on any report card: keep some of whatever comes to you, and set it up so it keeps growing while you aren’t watching.

KNOW & DO

Know: A degree raises your paycheck, but wealth is what you keep. Upbringing, habits and setup shape it more than genes or windfalls.

Do: Set up one automatic transfer on payday, to savings or a retirement account, so saving happens before you ever have to decide.

If this resonated, share it with someone who was raised on the same deal.

When I started writing here in August, I thought I’d be handing you what nine years in finance had taught me: the regulator, the models, the research on how irrational all of us are with our own money.

Last week I went back through all eight Sundays, one by one, to add a Know & Do to each. Reading them in order, I noticed something I hadn’t planned. Most of what’s in them, I didn’t learn at a desk or from school. I learned it from noticing my own ego that led me to skip the due diligence I’ve done for others’ money. I learned it from my mother who has lived through an economic crisis and knows what a hyperinflation was like. From a friend trying to figure out how much her investment advisor actually costs. From the people in a jury room who are responsible for theirs and others’ lives. From my roommate, half-awake over a granola bar frightened at knowing that her retirement is lent straight to where she wanted to escape.

Here is Season One in one place: eight stories, eight things to know, eight things to do. If you’re new here, start with whichever one sounds like you.

1. I’m an economist. I never checked the price.

I was 44, with a PhD and a $200,000 salary, standing in the kitchen of my new house, and a ten-dollar boba tea felt like an accusation. The lender had said they could lend me $850,000. What I could afford is closer to half of that number. Of course, why would they want to tell me that if my assets guarantee them a payback even with my default?

Know: The amount you qualify for is the bank’s ceiling, not what you can afford.

Do: Add up what one real month costs you, and include all the costs that keep you and your dependents alive. I’m talking about not just the property tax and home insurance but also utilities, transportation, groceries, healthcare, childcare, petcare, etc.

2. What your favorite “good deal” might be quietly costing you

Mai’s family conversations about why her uncle bought an old car he didn’t need over dinner somehow revealed everyone’s secret - we love buying ourselves out of our discomfort feelings. Mai’s discomfort was disguised in a softer form. Happy hour most evenings, and a real talent for spotting a “good deal.” One or two good deals is smart. Ten is a closet full of things you didn’t need, at the price of the handbag you felt superior to. By her late twenties, on a salary other people envied, she could barely save. Not because she was weak. An empty evening is uncomfortable, a “great deal” feels like winning, and there’s an entire industry built to sell you both.

Know: Beyond survival, every purchase buys one of three things: happiness, your future self, or twenty minutes of not feeling something.

Do: Before you pay, name which. Try it once this week, right before you buy. Two of those are worth paying for. The third never was.

3. The stock I was certain could never fall

My first stock was Amazon, bought on a feeling, and it made me money. That was the dangerous part: I mistook luck for skill. Years later, while I was running careful, evidence-based analysis for clients, I bought Boeing with my own money after its first crash. I was 100% sure it could never fall, and I skipped every step I’d have taken for anyone else. It climbed to a record high, which only rewarded my bad reasoning. Then came the second crash and the worldwide grounding. I doubled down. Not because the facts had changed, but because I couldn’t bear to be the expert who was wrong.

Know: What doubles down a losing bet isn’t greed. It’s the shame of being wrong.

Do: When a position scares you, follow what the data says, not what you need it to say. And before any “sure thing,” ask: why me? Why would I see a profit that hedge funds, paid all day to look, have missed? If the answer is a feeling, a story I love, or a tip, that isn’t an edge. It’s a single data point dressed up as certainty.

4. You’re not bad at money — you were taught to feel that way

Emily tracked every account to the dollar, but she couldn’t tell me what she paid each year to have it managed. Most advisors charge about 1% of everything they manage, every year, pulled straight from your balance each quarter. There’s no bill, so you never feel it. Over twenty years, that “tiny” 1% can swallow tens of thousands of dollars. Why doesn’t anyone tell you? No one in that chain is paid to teach you to do this yourself. Their livelihood depends on your believing you can’t. The jargon that leaves you feeling a little stupid in the meeting isn’t a side effect. It’s the product.

Know: An advisor’s real worth is a calm head, not secret stock picks. And you never get a bill; it’s skimmed from your balance.

Do: Ask for your all-in cost, in dollars, on one page: the advisor’s fee, the funds’ fees, even what it costs to execute your trades. Then ask yourself: am I paying because they invest better than I could, or because I’ve been taught to believe I never could?

Subscribe now

5. What is your most valuable asset?

I resented losing a workday to a jury summons. No more regular paycheck, a business to build, my time is valued by stress. Then the judge asked who couldn’t serve. A woman caring for her mother after a stroke. A man arranging the memorial for his in-laws. A man who tows cars and can’t afford to miss the days. Economists call this opportunity cost, and we usually price it in dollars: an hour here could have earned $100 there. But price everything in dollars and none of those choices survive. The caregiver hires a stranger for her mother, and the rest of us never sit in that room at all so a stranger can get a fair hearing. Money you can earn back. Time only draws down.

Know: Your most valuable asset isn’t the house, the car, or the accounts. It’s the years you have left.

Do: Once a week, look at where your hours went the way you’d look at where your money went. Ask what each hour bought you, not just what it could have earned.

6. “Laid off. I’m scared.”

A 25-year-old engineer, three months after a layoff, posted to Reddit: $25,000 in savings, $50,000 in a 401(k), three months of unemployment benefits left, Medicaid and food stamps secured, 300 applications, 10 interviews, no offers. He’d done everything right, and for now his money was handled. What he named in his title was fear. The comments rushed to fix his job search and his money. None spoke to the uncertainty, the lost direction, the question of what to do next with his life. I knew that fear. I carried it for over a year before I left my job, and recognizing it, instead of running from it, is what finally made room for something else.

Know: Sometimes a money question is really a life question in disguise.

Do: When fear spikes, ask what you’re actually afraid of before opening a spreadsheet. Is it running out of money, or not knowing what comes next? Those need very different answers.

7. $200 for a chunk of beef

I complained to my mother about a $200 piece of beef at Costco and called it inflation, the way everyone does. It isn’t. Inflation is the sea rising under every boat: your whole dollar buying about 3% less than last year. The beef is one big wave. America’s cattle herd is the smallest since 1951, and a cow takes two years of land, water and feed to reach the table. My mother laughed because she has seen the tsunami. In 1980s Vietnam, new currency was issued and the old one died, overnight, lifetime savings turned to paper, and prices climbed more than 700% a year. She knows the difference between something expensive and a catastrophe. Her generation’s answer to my complaint was to trade sideways: take what the earth offers cheaply this year. “If you want to get rich, you raise fish.”

Know: A scary price is a signal for change when one thing becomes less abundant, not an economic catastrophe.

Do: When it hits, rethink the way you’ve consumed that resource. Swap to what’s plentiful this year, and let the expensive thing come back on its own slow clock.

8. Is the $40 trillion national debt coming for your retirement?

Over breakfast, my roommate Lisa said the US was going downhill and she’d rather live in a country with zero government debt, like Japan. (Japan owes well over twice the size of its whole economy, far more than the US.) Then she realized part of her own retirement sits in Treasury bonds: the very debt she wanted to escape. The $40 trillion isn’t the number to watch. What matters is whether the economy grows faster than the interest on the debt, like climbing an escalator that’s moving down. You rise as long as you climb faster than it slides. Since 2022, higher interest rates have narrowed that gap. What holds up debt is trust, and the dollar is the most trusted money in the world today. But no money has ever been trusted forever.

Know: The national debt isn’t a bill with your name on it. It’s carried on trust, and it stays bearable only while the economy grows faster than the interest on it.

Do: Since neither the trust nor that gap is yours to control, control what is: don’t keep all your safety in a single promise. Diversify, even among the safe: different kinds of assets, real things you can use, more than one country’s promise.

Line them up and a pattern shows. Nearly every story starts with a number or a feeling nobody had looked at straight: the real cost of a month, the fee, the shame behind a losing trade, the fear under a Reddit post. And nearly every one ends the same way. Once you can see the thing, you can decide about it.

I’m not your advisor, and none of these is a rule. They’re what I’ve seen, from inside the industry and from the kitchen table. What you do with them is yours.

Subscribe now

If one of these made you think of someone, like a friend holding a mortgage offer or a parent paying an advisor they’ve never asked about, forward this to them.

Share

Which one stuck with you? Reply and tell me.

I can’t remember how we got to the $40 trillion national debt. But Lisa said it plainly: “I believe the US is going downhill. If I had a choice, I’d live in a country with zero government debt, like Japan.”

“Are you sure Japan has no debt?” I asked. “That’s what I remember, last I looked,” Lisa said. It’s actually the other way around. Japan owes more than almost any rich country — over twice the size of its whole economy, far more than the US — and it has had barely any inflation in thirty years. More debt, less inflation.

“I don’t know Japan’s exact number,” I said, “but the people who lend the government all that money — a lot of them are us. American families, American companies, foreign governments and investors too.” As soon as I said “us,” Lisa’s face turned alert. She’d just realized her workplace holds part of her own retirement in Treasury bonds — in the very debt she wanted to run from. I could feel the panic land, tangled up with her worry of running late. “Treasury bonds are among the safest things you can own, so don’t worry right now. Go get ready for work. I’ll explain more about what the debt means for you later.”

I first heard the $40 trillion figure on PBS NewsHour a few weeks earlier. Even I — a former financial economist, a PhD who has spent nine years working in markets and money — have a hard time wrapping my head around that number, or what it means for an ordinary day. The NewsHour tried to make it real: $40 trillion is roughly the value of every single-family home in America, all of them, added together. Which made me wonder — does that mean we’d all have to sell our houses to pay it off? For now, as long as the lenders (us, companies, foreign governments) still trust that the US will pay them back with interest, we’re okay. That word, trust, is doing all the work — a collective feeling shared by most of the world. But ultimately someone has to carry the debt behind all that trust, and the trust gets tested as the number keeps climbing. Who will pay? And when is the breakpoint?

A prominent macroeconomist, Olivier Blanchard, puts my worry in perspective. As long as the economy grows faster than the interest on its debt, the debt keeps falling behind us a little every year, and we’re okay. Picture walking up an escalator that’s moving down: the country is the one climbing, and the interest on the debt is the escalator sliding backward under its feet. As long as you climb faster than it descends, you rise. The danger is the flip: the day the escalator speeds up past your climb, and you slide down no matter what you do — and the only ways back up are higher taxes, deep cuts, or inflation. Since 2022, interest rates rose and that gap narrowed. So the number I actually watch isn’t the $40 trillion — it’s whether the country keeps climbing faster than the interest it owes.

I was raised to spend within what I had. Two decades in the US taught me the opposite is normal here: almost everyone borrows to buy a home, and even people who could pay cash often take the loan instead. When enough people can’t pay the mortgage, the banks that lent them the money get into trouble, and the government steps in to rescue them. How? The Fed can create new money, and the Treasury borrows more by selling bonds — roughly what happened in the 2008 crisis. When does that kind of money-creation become dangerous?

My parents know the answer in their bodies. I wrote about it last week: after the war, Vietnam killed its old currency in the 1980s and handed people back only a sliver of it. When money stops being trusted, the real things — food, land, anything you can hold — become worth everything, and their prices rocket. Vietnam had no trust from the world; no one wanted to hold its money. The dollar has the opposite. It’s the safest house on the block — a real thing to be, and only ever true relative to the other houses. Over a long enough stretch, the block changes; a century ago the world’s safe money was the British pound. The US is nowhere near that edge. But “nowhere near” is a distance, not a promise — which is why Lisa’s fear wasn’t foolish. It was early.

Back in the kitchen, Lisa had already rushed out the door, still holding the panic, still unconvinced. Is her retirement — sitting in the so-called safest asset there is — really safe?

Here’s what I wanted to tell her, and it isn’t “don’t worry.” You can’t fix the debt, and you can’t freeze the ranking that keeps the dollar on top. What you can do is refuse to put all of your safety in a single promise — even the safest one. Diversify, even among the safe. Lisa’s retirement in Treasury bonds isn’t a mistake; it only becomes one if it’s the only thing she holds. Spreading out — different kinds of assets, real things you can use, more than one country’s promise — is how you hold both truths at once.

KNOW & DO

The national debt isn’t a bill with your name on it — it’s carried on trust, and it stays bearable only while the economy grows faster than the interest on it. Since neither the trust nor that gap is yours to control, control what is: don’t keep all your safety in a single promise — diversify, even among the safe.

Subscribe now

P.S. What’s a money fear you’ve carried that turned out to be aimed at the wrong thing? Leave a comment and tell me — I read every one.

Leave a comment

On Saturday morning, coffee in hand, I called my mother. She’s in Vietnam, I’m in the United States, and the eleven-hour gap makes catching up a small act of scheduling. She answered with her usual smile. I told her I’d just been to Costco and seen a single chunk of beef priced at two hundred dollars. “Why bother robbing a bank?” I said. “Just rob the grocery store where they keep the beef.” She laughed. “Two hundred dollars for a piece of beef,” she said. “That’s ridiculous.”

I kept going, the way you do with a small outrage. Spinach, five dollars a bunch. A single peach, more than a dollar. Everything had floated upward, as if the tags were reprinted while I wasn’t looking. We’re living in an inflationary time, I told her — and then I bought the cheapest cut I could find, fifty dollars for five pounds, and told myself it was a smart decision, which is what we say when we’ve traded down and want it to feel like a choice.

I called it “inflation,” the way everyone does at the checkout — shorthand for “everything costs more.” But that’s not what happened to the beef, and the difference is the whole point.

When economists say inflation, they mean something specific and boring: your dollar, all of it, quietly buying less than last year — right now about three percent less. That’s the sea slowly rising under every boat. The beef isn’t the sea rising. It’s one big wave — and America eats a lot of beef, so we feel it hard. America’s cattle herd is the smallest it has been since 1951 — drought burned the grass, feed and fuel got dear, and high prices pushed ranchers to sell their cows instead of breeding them, which shrank the herd further. Fewer cows, same hungry country. That isn’t your money losing value. That’s one animal getting scarce.

And a cow is a terrible machine for making dinner. Two years of grass and grain to bring one animal to the table, and in all that time it gives you exactly one calf. You aren’t really paying two hundred dollars for beef. You’re paying for two years of land, water, feed, and waiting — and lately all four got dearer at once.

My mother has seen not a wave but a tsunami. In the years after the war she was finishing college, newly married, with a newborn — me — plus ten younger siblings and her own mother to carry. I was a baby then, responsible for nothing; she was holding up a household. I learned how hard those years were — from her bedtime stories, and later from photographs and documentaries. After the war, Vietnam ran on ration coupons: a family could buy a kilo and a half of pork a month; the officials, more. People lined up for rice in one of the largest rice-growing nations on earth. Then, in 1985, the government reissued the currency overnight and let you trade only a sliver of the old money for the new. Savings built over a lifetime turned to paper by morning. Gold was the only thing that held its value, and it had to be traded on the black market and hidden. By 1986 prices were climbing more than seven hundred percent a year. Millions decided the risk of staying was worse than the odds of an escape boat.

So when my mother laughs at two-hundred-dollar beef, she isn’t laughing the way I am. I’m annoyed. She’s amused — because she has seen the difference between a thing that is expensive and an economic catastrophe that ends lives, and she knows we are, fortunately, only talking about the first.

Subscribe now

My mother, a shrewd businesswoman, built a business from almost nothing. When the country finally let people buy and sell again, she saw the value in a few yards of fabric — bought in bulk, resold, and grew it into a clothing company. So whenever we drove past a fish farm, she shared her business wisdom: “If you want to get rich, you raise fish.” Not cows — fish. A cow gives you one calf and eats for two years; a fish lays thousands of eggs at once and turns nearly a pound of feed into a pound of fish, where a cow needs six or ten. She wasn’t talking about the environment. She was talking about resources — about not fighting nature, choosing what the earth makes easily over what it makes slowly and dear.

That is the part I keep. When a price jumps, most of us panic, get angry, or complain. But there’s another move, the one my mother’s whole generation learned the hard way — you trade sideways. You ask what the earth is offering cheaply this year, and you take that instead. The beef will ease eventually; a calf born today reaches the table in about two years, and the herd rebuilds on its own slow clock. Until then there is no shame, and a quiet kind of power, in the fifty-dollar beef cut and the fish. My mother lost everything money can be, once, and came out the other side sure of one thing:

KNOW & DO

A scary price is a signal for change when one thing becomes less abundant — not an economic catastrophe. When it hits, rethink the way you’ve consumed that resource.

Subscribe now

P.S. What money lesson did someone in your family carry out of a harder time? Reply and tell me — I read every one, and it might become a piece.

Leave a comment

Images: beef photo by Jakob Trost and banknote photo by rc.xyz nft gallery (Unsplash)

I went to Reddit r/personalfinance trying to understand what the biggest money pain people are carrying. What caught my eye was the post at the top of the community, “Laid off. I’m scared.” — with over 4.4k upvotes and 1.1k comments. I was curious. What is he looking for from a forum full of strangers on Reddit?

Twenty-five-year-old engineer, three months post-layoff, $25k in savings and $50k in a 401k both untouched, three months of unemployment benefits left, a month-to-month lease, secured Medicaid and food stamps. He’s applied to 300 jobs, landed 10 interviews, no offers yet.

So I asked myself the same question again, because it doesn’t seem like a money problem he’s going through, or like he’s looking for advice on how to fix his job search. He’s named his feeling in his title: “I’m scared.” He’s done all the right things — saved when he could, secured the social welfare support, maximized his job search effort. He followed the textbook life rules like an A+ student. Is he asking for permission to be scared? Does he want to know that many others have had or are going through the same feeling he’s carrying, and that he’s not alone? Or… is he lost?

But I think what he's really asking is, “What should I do?” He’s hoping that one of the millions of strangers out there could guide him clearly on what to do next — a direction to seek safety, to run away from the fear of facing uncertainty.

Eyes glued to the bright, white-lit monitor, I found myself back there. In fact, I’d had that fear for over a year before I left my job. My company had been reorganizing, starting with voluntary buyouts and moving to involuntary terminations. Like the thousands of us who stayed, I’d been showing up to work with the anxiety of losing my job almost every day for months. I took it home with me to my daughter and my dog, carried it on my shoulder during every walk, and let it lie next to me in bed.

Subscribe now

I scrolled down to look at the comments. The earliest readers immediately advised him on how to fix his job search and money problem — telling him to open up to non-local jobs and be willing to relocate, to fix his interview skills, and, in a sarcastic tone, to remember the $25k in savings he could rely on. Some offered solidarity — “me too.” Some helped him name a villain: “Entry level software is a slaughterhouse right now.” Some named the “shame” feeling he’d never mentioned. None recognized his discomfort in facing uncertainty, his fear of losing the safety of the status quo, his loss of direction about what to do next with his life. Of the six months his unemployment benefits gave him, he’d already spent three looking for a job. Should he continue to spend the three remaining months doing the same thing?

That was my reading of his post.

Back to reality. It’s been five months since I left my job. The anxious energy I’d carried for over a year had mostly drained away by the time I actually walked out. It still came back from time to time, but recognizing it and embracing it somehow left the space for my other energies and thoughts to grow. I’ve had the clarity to see my strengths, the calmness to refuse to normalize the fact that between a third and two-thirds of us live paycheck to paycheck in a country where health coverage comes with the job, and the courage to leave my comfortable status-quo job to uncover the hidden money knowledge for everyday people.

Through a virtual meeting, my mentor said, “You look happy, happier than when you were at your job.” I responded with a smile, “I know I’m broke. I have no money coming in and a lot going out to keep my house, pay the bills, and buy my food. I’m working 8 to 10 hours a day, even some on the weekends. But somehow, I feel so happy.”

The way that post went viral says something about the feelings and questions we all carry — published or unpublished, told or untold, accepted or unaccepted.

Do we want someone to tell us what to do with our lives? Or do we just need to allow ourselves to sit with our true selves? The Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh wrote a poem called “Please Call Me by My True Names.”

Names, plural. Not one.

Like the Reddit poster, I’ve also been figuring out what to do next with my life, in every minute of my breath. Would I say I’ve figured it out? Maybe yes, maybe no. All I know is that, right now, my mind is kinder to me. It’s telling me I’m doing the right thing.

KNOW & DO

Sometimes a money question is really a life question in disguise. When fear spikes, ask what you’re actually afraid of before opening a spreadsheet.

---

Subscribe now

And if none of those is quite it — reply and tell me. I read every one.

Leave a comment

Fifteen minutes into my 8 a.m. call with Alex, my developer, I was somewhere deep inside a business problem — the kind where the rest of the world goes quiet. My phone lit up in the corner of my eye. I keep it on silent, no notifications; they pull me out of the water. I almost didn’t look. Then one word on the screen caught: Jury Duty.

It took a second to land. Then it landed all at once. I’d read that letter. I’d even set a reminder to call the number the night before — and my scattered mind had swallowed the reminder whole, the way it swallows so much when I’m heads-down. “Alex — hold on,” I said, already digging for the letter, phone to my ear, a recorded voice reading out the numbers being called. Mine was one of them. I ended the call and was out the door with the letter still in my hand.

I got to the circuit court around nine, checked in, and joined five hundred–odd people in a big, white-lit room to wait. It felt like an airport — laptops open, a few books, most faces lit by phones — except none of us knew what we were waiting for. The panic drained out of me, and annoyance seeped in to take its place. This was time I couldn’t afford to not work — no more regular paychecks, a business to get off the ground, ten-hour days that don’t stop for weekends. I sat there resenting the wait.

After a couple of hours, fifty of us were called upstairs for a trial. The courtroom was small and bright, lit a hard yellow, with rows of fold-down theater seats and the judge raised above us behind a curved wooden rail. We lined up by number — most of us first-timers with no idea what we were doing — and he began asking the questions meant to find out whether we could be fair.

Two of them I haven’t been able to forget.

The first: had any of us, or anyone in our immediate family, ever been the victim of a crime? Slowly, ten or fifteen people stood. A man whose car had been broken into. A woman, maybe in her early thirties, who began to describe a break-in from years ago — and when the judge gently asked her to say more, her eyes dropped, her voice shook, and the words wouldn’t come. “Are you okay talking about this?” he asked. “I know it can be hard. We can talk later, somewhere more private.” Another whose mother had been attacked in an airport years ago, and cut. One after another, strangers offered up the worst thing that had ever happened to them. It felt like a confession session — and the judge listened to each one the way a priest does, without flinching, without hurry.

As they spoke, I felt lucky — grateful, really. The worst thing I’ve suffered was getting pickpocketed once in Vietnam, gone by the next day and leaving no scar. These people had carried theirs for years.

Subscribe now

Then the judge explained the trial could last three days, and asked whether anyone had a real reason they couldn’t serve.

A woman stood: her mother had had a stroke the week before, and she was the primary caregiver. Her sister was covering for now — but not for three days.

A man stood: both his in-laws had died a few weeks earlier, and the memorial was this weekend — the one he was supposed to be arranging.

And then, last of all, a man stood and said, plainly, “I can’t. I have to work. I have to make money.” The judge asked what kind of work he did. “I tow cars,” he said. That was all he had. A few people nearby seemed ready to laugh at the smallness of the answer. I couldn’t. I saw a whole family standing behind that sentence — depending on his hands, his hours, the days he can and can’t afford to miss.

What I watched, over and over, was a trade-off — time against something else. And the something else was almost never dollars. It was a mother mid-stroke. A memorial for people you loved. Economists have a name for this: opportunity cost. We usually measure it in money — the hour I spent writing this could have earned me, say, $100 somewhere else, so that’s its “cost.” But is that the real measure? I could spend this hour earning $100 — or hearing my dad tell the same childhood story again, or on the floor with my baby niece. I come away from the second kind richer in every way money doesn’t count. Price everything in dollars and none of it survives: the caregiver hires a stranger for her mother, the man pays someone to bury his in-laws, and the rest of us never sit in a room like this at all.

The only shared currency in that room was time. Every one of us had spent the same five or six hours there, so that a stranger could get a fair hearing.

When the twelve jurors were finally chosen, the rest of us were thanked and sent home. I walked out no longer counting those five hours as money I hadn’t earned. I’d spent them on something else — a morning inside other people’s lives, each of them carrying as much as I do, or more.

So — what’s your most valuable asset? Walking to my car, I knew mine. It’s time: being alive, and what I choose to do with the hours.

Here’s the one habit worth stealing. Once a week, look at where your hours went the way you’d look at where your money went. Money you can earn back. Time only ever draws down — and it’s the truest budget you have.

KNOW & DO

Your most valuable asset isn’t the house, the car, or the accounts — it’s the years you have left. This week, notice where your hours actually go.

Subscribe now

If you did that this week — actually looked at where your hours went — what surprised you? Reply and tell me; I read every one.

Leave a comment

Emily showed me a folder once. Every account, every balance, tracked to the dollar — because in her life, nothing gets tracked unless she tracks it.

She left her career years ago to care for her family, and she hasn’t had a spare hour, or a full night’s sleep, since. She saves every dollar she can; she has to. So she keeps the numbers close. She knew, to the penny, how much she had.

Then I asked the one question she couldn’t answer: how much do you pay, each year, to have that money managed? She went quiet. “I don’t actually know.”

I told her the fix was simple — ask your advisor for one page listing every fee you paid last year. That’s his job. Something flickered in her face. A hesitation. Months later, she told me she’d finally done something about it: she’d switched advisors entirely. She never quite said why. She just hadn’t been comfortable.

Here’s what I keep thinking about. It would be easy to say she was too busy to manage her own money. But that’s not it — she makes time for tennis, for friends, for the people she loves. Time wasn’t the wall.

The wall was fear. Somewhere along the way she’d been taught — we’ve all been taught — that investing is a licensed profession, too complicated for a regular person to do without a specialist. It comes wrapped in acronyms and jargon that seem designed to remind you that you don’t belong. Have you ever sat in the meeting where they report your “return”? Most people nod along, understanding maybe half, and leave feeling a little stupid and very grateful someone else is handling it.

Here’s the quiet conflict at the center of the business: no one in that chain is paid to teach you to do this yourself. Their livelihood depends on your believing that you can’t.

And the price of that belief hides where you’ll never feel it. Most advisors charge about one percent of everything they manage for you, every year. You never write a check — it’s pulled straight from your balance, usually each quarter, so the money’s gone before you’d notice. One percent sounds like a rounding error. It isn’t. On a nest egg you’ve spent twenty years building, that “tiny” one percent can quietly swallow tens of thousands of dollars — enough to buy a car, or cover a year of college — and you never once saw it leave. And some people pay far more. Jessica does. She’s comfortable — no one depending on her, more degrees than most of us — and she pays about three times that, roughly three percent a year, because she’s frightened of what would happen without an advisor. She said it plainly: “I don’t know anything about investing, and I don’t trust myself.” The fee isn’t the scandal. Not knowing it is.

Subscribe now

Now let me be fair, because I’m not here to tell you to fire anyone. A good advisor can be worth every dollar — just not for the reason they’re sold. You’re not mostly paying for someone who picks winners the rest of us can’t. You’re paying for a calm, objective head when yours isn’t: someone to talk you off the ledge the week the market drops, to catch you before your fear of losing costs you more than the loss. That’s real. The honest job title is closer to financial therapist than money genius. And it can be worth it — if you know that’s what you’re buying.

So before your next meeting, or your next signature, two questions.

Ask them: What is my all-in cost, in real dollars, every year — to everyone in the chain? Not the percentage. The dollars — the advisor’s fee, the funds’ fees, even what it costs to execute my trades. You have every right to a straight answer on one page, and how they respond tells you almost everything.

And the last question is one to ask yourself, not them: am I paying this person because they genuinely invest better than I could — or because I’ve been taught to believe I never could? One of those is worth paying for. The other isn’t the truth about you — it’s a fear you can unlearn.

You ask the price of everything before you buy it. You’re allowed to ask it here. And whatever the jargon has trained you to feel, you are far more capable of understanding the answer than you’ve been led to believe. The fear was sold to you. You’re allowed to hand it back.

Emily knew every number in that folder. She was never the problem — no one had ever told her she was allowed to ask.

KNOW & DO

An advisor’s real worth is a calm head, not secret stock picks — and you never get a bill; it’s skimmed from your balance. Ask yours what you pay, in dollars.

---

Subscribe now

What’s a money question you’ve always found confusing — or been a little afraid to ask? Reply and tell me; it might be the next piece I write.

Leave a comment

(Names and some details have been changed to protect the people in this story.)

A few years before anyone paid me to pick investments, I bought my first stock on a feeling.

I was driving, half-listening to the radio talk about a company called Amazon. Hardly anyone shopped online yet, but I did — I loved that the boxes now arrived in a day instead of two weeks, loved that when an order went wrong, a person refunded me over the phone, no return needed. I liked Amazon. So the next morning I opened a free brokerage account, googled “best commission-free app,” and bought a few thousand dollars of its stock.

It rose within weeks. I sold a couple of months later, pocketed a nice profit, and felt something I can only now name as dangerous: I felt smart. Watching that ticker was also a small escape from a full, tiring season of my life when I was constantly running from client calls to cooking to diaper changes. I told myself I had a knack for this.

I didn’t. I had luck. But luck, when you mistake it for skill, writes a check your ego is glad to cash.

Subscribe now

Years later I made finance my actual job. I studied at night, changed careers, and became one of the people a firm pays to decide what to buy and sell for its clients. I built the models. I weighed the risks. I balanced return against the odds of being wrong — and I delivered good returns, for other people. On a client’s account I was disciplined; I used evidence, and set aside any feeling I couldn’t back with data — every single time.

And then, quietly, for my own money, I bet on Boeing.

Boeing wasn’t just a stock to me. It was the company that changed my life by letting me travel the world — the kind of name that feels too iconic to fall. My parents agreed the moment I mentioned it: the safest bet in the world. So after Boeing’s first crash, when the plane was in every headline, I bought — certain a company like that could never fall. In my head I’d given it a probability of 100% up and zero down. I had put my whole faith in Boeing, without the analysis I’d have run for any client.

And for a while, the market told me I was right. The stock shrugged off that first crash and climbed to a record high. I felt vindicated — see, I do have a knack for this. That is the most dangerous thing that can happen to an investor: to be rewarded for bad reasoning. It doesn’t correct you. It just hands you a bigger seat at the table before the table breaks.

Then came the second crash, the worldwide grounding, and the long slide after.

Here is what I had forgotten. Nothing in markets — or in life — is a zero or a one. No company, no country, no empire has stayed on top forever; change is the default setting of the world. And one good run tells you nothing about the next — no more than two sunny days predict the month. My Statistics 101 class had a name for it: a tiny sample can’t stand in for the whole. I knew it cold. I’d built a career on it. And I ignored every word the moment the money was mine and the feeling was loud.

The stock kept falling. And I did the thing I’d have talked any client out of — I doubled down. Not because the facts had changed, but because I couldn’t bear to be the expert who was wrong. That’s the part no one warns you about: what traps you isn’t greed, it’s shame. At the worst of it, I was down a couple months of expenses — and in a time when our income was uncertain, that hurt far more than the number itself. I held it for years, and eventually sold it to help buy a home.

We all run a version of this. We buy the stock because we love how the product or service makes us feel.

Our memory does the rest — it keeps the one big winner and quietly buries all the others, so we go on believing we're better at this than we are. Have you added up your whole portfolio, subtracted every fee, and looked at what you actually earned each year?

So here’s the question I ask myself now — and the one I’d hand you, especially today, when anyone with an AI can produce a confident prediction in seconds: if you’re certain you’ve spotted a profit no one else sees, stop and ask — why me? Why would I be the only one — when there are hedge funds paid all day to find exactly that? If the answer is a feeling, a model I built last weekend, a story I love, or a tip that sounds too good — that isn’t an edge. It’s a single data point dressed up as a certainty.

That’s Statistics 101. It just took me a very expensive lesson to finally learn it.

KNOW & DO

What doubles down a losing bet isn’t greed — it’s the shame of being wrong. When a position scares you, follow what the data says, not what you need it to say.

---

Subscribe now

So, what's the one you're still holding because selling would mean admitting you were wrong? Reply and tell me. I won't ask for the ticker.

Leave a comment

The family was back at Mai’s parents’ place in the city, worn out, settling around the round dining table after the long drive home from the hometown. Her uncle had bought fresh fish off the boat the moment he heard they were visiting, and it was all laid out now — rice paper, herbs, noodles, and the sauce you can’t eat it without. The good kind of tired.

Somewhere between bites, Mai’s father mentioned his car. The whole drive home, he said — his face carefully neutral, not quite hiding the pride — had cost him about eight litres of gas. Her uncle looked up, genuinely surprised: his own older car would have taken ninety.

Mai’s mother, gentle and direct in the way she’d been all of Mai’s life, asked the question their family has been asking each other for as long as anyone could remember: “What did you buy that old car for?” She knew he didn’t need it — back home, a scooter gets you most places faster anyway. Then, in a softer voice, she said — a car for your work earns its keep; a car just for the fun of it quietly charges you the whole time, the gas, the tolls, the repairs on something that old. Did you ever add it up?

Her father, who owns two cars, went quiet. Then, with a small, uncomfortable smile — though no one had said a word to him — he deflected into a joke: “Fine. Why don’t you sell my two cars, then?”

Mai didn’t laugh. Part of her wanted to slip away, the way she always had when the family circled money. But she stayed, and watched, because she’d just recognized every person at that table. Herself most of all.

Here’s something Mai had come to believe and could never quite un-believe. Once survival is handled — the roof, the food, the lights — every dollar you spend is trying to buy one of two honest things: a little happiness, or a better version of your future self. The spending that never haunts you buys one of those two.

And then there’s a third kind — the one that dresses up as the first. The unplanned purchase. The one you can’t really pay back. It promises happiness and delivers neither.

Mai’s version had run for years, and it never looked reckless. She didn’t care about luxury bags or thousand-dollar shoes — too obvious. Hers was softer: a social person with no real hobby outside of work. Happy hour most evenings. Dinners out on weekends. And the trap she was almost proud of — she was very good at spotting a “good deal.” Buying one or two good deals is smart. Ten of them is a closet full of things she didn’t need, at a price that quietly matched the handbags she felt superior to.

By her late twenties, on a salary other people envied, she finally added it all up — the rent, the outings, the deals, everything. She could barely save.

None of it was because she was weak. It’s because an empty evening is uncomfortable, “a great deal” feels like winning, and there’s an entire industry built to sell you both. The escape is real. It’s just rented — and the rent comes due in the very feeling you were running from, plus interest.

Subscribe now

She felt the other side of it — not at a store, not on a beach. She and her mother were biking home together after playing pickleball. On the decades-old bikes, they were sweating, out of breath, and laughing about the last point. Her mother looked over and said, “This was enough.” Nothing bought, nothing owed. That was the whole thing. That was happiness, and it hadn’t cost a dollar.

So here’s the question worth asking before you pull out the credit card: which one is this? Happiness? My future self? Or just me, not wanting to feel something — or not wanting to miss out — for the next twenty minutes?

Two of those are worth paying for. The third never was.

KNOW & DO

Beyond survival, every purchase buys one of three things: happiness, your future self, or twenty minutes of not feeling something. Before you pay, name which.

---

Subscribe now

You don’t need a budgeting app to catch this. You just need the question — and the honesty to answer it. Try it once this week, right before you buy, and notice which of the three it really is. I’d love to know what you find.

Leave a comment

The boba tea cost ten dollars. I stood in the kitchen of my new house — the big, beautiful one — holding it like evidence.

A week earlier I’d moved $20,000 from savings into checking. It was already gone, and I couldn’t have told you where. So the tea in my hand had started to feel like an accusation. So did the $100 dinner from the weekend, and the clothes I’d bought for a closet that was already full.

I was 44. I had a PhD. I made $200,000 a year. I'd spent three years as an investment economist deciding where a wealth-advisory firm's clients should put their money, then six more inside FINRA, learning how securities actually trade and what brokers owe the people they trade for. I knew that world cold. And there I was, feeling stressed, worried, regretting of spending $10 on a boba tea.

Let me tell you how I got there plainly, because the mechanism matters more than the embarrassment.

I already owned a home outright. I had cash reserves, securities, a 401(k). By every number I’d have used to judge a stranger, I was fine — which is exactly why I skipped the one calculation that mattered. The lender told me they could lend me $850,000, and I heard what most people hear: that someone had checked, and I could afford it.

That’s the part nobody says out loud at the closing table. “The amount you qualify for” and “the amount you can afford” are two different sentences. The first is the bank’s ceiling. The second is your floor — the number you actually have to stand on, every month, after everything. Nobody in that room is paid to tell you the second one. So I signed for $750,000, paid the deposit, and let the momentum carry me through the door.

Then I sat down in the big beautiful house and finally did the arithmetic.

My take-home pay was $7,200 a month. The mortgage, property tax, HOA, and insurance — before a single grocery, before gas, before the pediatrician or the vet — ate almost all of it.

I was funding my own family’s survival out of savings. While employed. While “successful.” While earning a number that’s supposed to mean you’ve arrived. Maybe your number is $150,000. Maybe it’s $400,000. The size of it was never the thing that protected me.

Eight months after I signed, I lost the job.

I’d like to tell you this is a story about me being uniquely foolish. It isn’t. Last December, Bankrate asked Americans how they’d cover a $1,000 emergency. More than half said they couldn’t do it from savings. Across the country that’s roughly 141 million adults — one bad car repair away from a credit card. I'd spent my whole career in finance. I never pictured myself inside that number.

Subscribe now

My mother has asked me the same question my whole life. “If you make $100, how much do you spend?” I used to find it quaint. At a work event once, I asked five or six colleagues — people who do finance for a living — whether they’d ever actually added up their own spending. One had. One.

So I did the thing I’d spent my whole career doing for strangers’ portfolios and had never once done for my own: I opened a spreadsheet and added up what it costs me to live.

The big pieces were easy. It was the slippery ones that got me — car registration, the inspection, tolls, the rideshare when the car’s in the shop, the maintenance I ignore until the light comes on. Childcare. Healthcare. Taxes. The vet, again. I can price a stranger’s investment fees to the last decimal. I had never added up the cost of my own ordinary month.

At the bottom of the spreadsheet was a scary number — the real one, what it actually takes for my daughter and me to survive.

And here’s the part I didn’t expect. The number frightened me, but knowing it did something the fear never could: it made me calm. For months the danger had been shapeless — everywhere, in every ten-dollar cup of tea. Now it had an edge. I could see it.

I found more freedom in one honest number than I’d found in the whole beautiful house.

KNOW & DO

The amount you qualify for is the bank’s ceiling, not what you can afford. Add up what one real month costs you, and make that your number.

---

Subscribe now

So I’ll ask you what my mother asks me: if you make $100, how much do you actually spend? Not the ceiling someone approved you for — the floor you stand on. If you’ve never added it up, I’d love to know what stops you.

Leave a comment