A Blended Family, a College-Savings "Ghost," and a Budget That Didn't Add Up: Ramit Sethi Talks With Mia and Jake

Open on YouTube ↗
Overview

Ramit Sethi of I Will Teach You To Be Rich frames this episode around a habit he sees often among American parents: spending in the name of the kids, especially on fully funding college, without ever running the numbers. Sethi says he has no objection to extracurriculars, big birthday parties, or paying for college, as long as the choices are deliberate and the math has been done. His complaint is that most parents follow a script instead, and that the script can cost them their own financial future.

31 min read

His guests are Mia, 40, and Jake, 38. They have been married for four years and have a blended family: two children from Mia's previous marriage, aged 14 and 11, and a three-year-old daughter together. Mia applied because she worried that paying for the older children's college was building resentment. Over the conversation, the question moves away from whether Jake resents the spending. It becomes why the couple is spending the most money in their budget on something they have never examined.

The numbers that didn't make sense

Before meeting them, Sethi reads the couple's Conscious Spending Plan (CSP) aloud and calls it "perplexing." It showed assets of $443,000, investments of zero, savings of $13,900, and debt of $176,410, for a net worth of $280,490. The percentages also looked odd to him. Fixed costs were 50%, which he liked. Investments were listed at 22% even though the balance was zero. Savings were a high 25%. Guilt-free spending was 3%, and he said outright that he didn't believe it. Savings of $13,900 also struck him as low for a family with three children.

Resentment or frustration?

Mia's application said the couple's values were mostly aligned, but that she felt "resentment from my husband that a big chunk of our money goes to support my two kids who are not his biological kids." In person she softened this. She thinks they agree on values, but the implementation creates an "underlying tension." A lot of their money is going toward making up for the fact that she didn't plan and save earlier when her older children were young. Moments like "we can't even go out to dinner this week" leave her feeling guilty.

Jake rejected the word "resentment" and offered "frustration" instead. He is earning more than ever after landing a job he had worked toward. His idea of a rich life is being able to eat out or buy a few things without stress. He gave an example from the day before the recording. While walking around, he had remarked that if they redirected the money going to college, they could buy a hot tub and start landscaping within about eight months. Mia said her reaction to comments like that is usually to go quiet or laugh it off. Jake said he doesn't resent Mia or the kids: "That's where they were at their time."

Both described the same imbalance. As much money as possible goes to the children, through 529 college savings for the older two and a costly preschool for the youngest. That leaves very little for day-to-day or guilt-free spending, which doesn't feel sustainable to them. Mia also said that giving themselves more at the kids' expense "feels selfish," and Jake agreed.

Asked whether they make money decisions together, Mia said yes on the big picture, but that money isn't something they think about much. Jake summed up his philosophy with a joke about his Midwest upbringing: "you just save money, then you die, and you give it to your kids." Money conversations usually start with Mia saying "we have to do the budget." Jake said that phrase triggers anxiety and anger in him. Mia said it raises her anxiety too, because budgets have always been hard for her. She tries to explain her thinking without fully understanding it herself. Jake then asks a reasonable question, she doesn't know the answer, and they both get stressed. Her default is to treat the kids' money as if it doesn't exist, which makes it non-negotiable. She said she was open to changing that.

Sethi noted that things would be far harder if Jake had refused to contribute anything to the older children. Since their values seem to line up, the real question is how much help to give in a blended family. He also began to suspect they had only thought of help as the size of a check.

The "house-broke" years and a hard reversal

Asked why he's confused when Mia says they can't afford to eat out, Jake told the backstory. When they got together, both on their second marriage, they bought a house of almost 4,000 square feet with a three-car garage. Jake called it a "10 out of 10" on their wish list. He also bought a Toyota Tundra for around $50,000 and spent $3,000 on rims. They bought new furniture, and Jake built an expensive home gym during COVID. Mia said they were "so happy to have happiness" that they wanted everything.

Once they started talking seriously about finances, they realized they were house-poor. They sold the house and bought one about $200,000 cheaper in the same neighborhood, which they say feels much more like them. They sold the truck and the gym equipment and kept one paid-off car. They later bought a larger car because the older kids had grown. Both credited their parents with teaching them to avoid any debt except a mortgage, so the house was the obvious lever. Mia described those years as "being strangled." She tracked every line, down to "$12.37" spent on donuts for the kids. Selling everything felt good, Jake said. Mia's summary: "it was almost like we had an entire relationship in like 3 years."

Sethi praised the reversal more than he criticized the original mistake. In his view, everyone makes money mistakes, and the valuable skill is taking a dispassionate look at the numbers and correcting course. People who can do that can move fast because they trust themselves to fix errors. He said he was "willing to bet" they would never be house-poor again. Later, when they reviewed their new mortgage of $1,776 a month (about 9% of gross income, on a 15-year loan at 6%, compared with more than $2,000 before), the couple called it one of their proudest money decisions. They said they still look at each other and say how glad they are they did it. Sethi pointed to this as proof that they can make and celebrate a hard decision, and said he wanted to "transfer" that ability to the rest of their finances.

Overcorrecting, and the wish for someone to take charge

Sethi asked whether things feel better now. Mia described the current setup as "yanking the steering wheel" the other way. After selling the house, they put all the extra money toward college, possibly as an overcorrection. That raised the question of whether saving for college is "the right thing." Sethi replied, "Well, isn't a house the right thing to be buying?"

Jake said he keeps wishing someone would "put their arm around me and say, 'Son, this is what you're supposed to do.'" Sethi told him that person doesn't exist: not his father, not anyone except himself. Jake accepted this and said what he really wants is to be confident in their decisions. He also admitted he doesn't know what "making your money work for you" means. His best guess was "putting it into the stock market." Mia wondered whether their pension explains this, since it meant they never had to think about a 401(k). Jake knows only that the pension is based on the top three years of salary. That is part of why he keeps adding income: he has two master's degrees and is becoming a principal the following year.

Asked what he would do with more money, Jake listed saving, house projects like landscaping and replacing a hot tub they inherited that had broken, and possibly a healthy meal service to reduce stress after work. Mia agreed on the house and the food idea but said meal services cost so much more than groceries. The one likely point of disagreement is travel, which Mia wants and Jake sees as a "not a need of mine."

Sethi told the audience that the couple was very likable, but that their politeness made it hard to get straight answers or tell whether they agreed. He made it his "personal mission" to show them they could be direct and still kind. He asked whether they liked feeling anxious about money. Both said no, firmly. He pointed out that the dynamic they had built kept them anxious all the time anyway.

The spreadsheet as "paper pushing"

Mia said filling out the CSP was the first time she had a concrete way to see the big picture. Before, she didn't know how to calculate their net worth, even though she had kept a budget for years. She described her old method in detail. They put everything on credit cards for the points and always pay them off. Each month she copied the statement line by line into a spreadsheet, checked for suspicious charges, sorted items into categories she had invented, and tracked them over several months against targets for clothes, eating out, and so on. She knew she was duplicating information that already existed. Asked what it got her, she said: "I think I felt like I was controlling our money."

Sethi called this a classic example of "playing money," or paper pushing: moving things around for a feeling of control and treating motion as productivity. He said nobody forced her to do it, and it was probably an echo of her parents. He credited her with recognizing it and stopping.

Looking at the numbers, Jake felt their net worth was low relative to their income, said he didn't understand the investments line, and felt "amazing" about the debt because it is only the mortgage. Mia said she was proud there was something there but felt guilty it wasn't more. She wished she had made different decisions earlier in life. Jake said guilt would be his only feeling, and only if the debt were higher. Sethi joked that he could show Mia a glass of water and she'd feel guilt, and she agreed.

Their gross monthly income was $18,862, or about $226,000 a year. Jake had only known their net figure and would have guessed around $200,000. That high income is exactly what stresses them, they said: why are they counting pennies? Asked whether earning $500,000 would end the stress, Jake first said yes, then conceded he would probably always be stressed.

Where the money was really going

Fixed costs at 50% looked good at first. Sethi said that is the low end of the 50–60% range he expects for a high-income couple. The 22% investments figure was the pension, about $3,000 a month. The 25% savings was mostly the kids' 529s plus the emergency fund. Sethi said he would have filed the 529s under investments, but that the placement showed their priorities.

Guilt-free spending was listed at $364 a month. Mia admitted that was just what was left over. They estimated real discretionary spending at $1,500 to $2,000 a month. Sethi used $2,000, explaining that he always wants to be conservative so there are no surprises. That exposed a gap. The plan put $700 a month into a long-term emergency fund, yet savings were only $13,900. They had been drawing from savings, which they wanted to stop. Their savings covered about two months of expenses, and Mia said that felt "scary."

Jake explained his avoidance with an analogy: money scares him the way girls did when he was going through puberty. He didn't understand it, so he avoided it. He talked about a deep-seated fear of seeming dumb by asking questions, called it a "knowing gap" he wants to close, and compared it to learning a new sport. Mia said her fear outweighs her anger. Sethi told listeners that at some point people have to face such fears, and that nobody else is coming to save them. He added that he had always understood money intuitively but felt like the odd one out in areas like fitness, so he has compassion for people who find money confusing.

Mia's fear is that a catastrophe would leave them without money. Sethi compared this to fearing a fall in the shower and buying a mat, and asked why their savings hadn't grown if the fear was real. Mia answered that in the moment she wants a trip or a purchase, she thinks "I'll deal with it later," and that this happens "probably all the time." She estimated their money conversations as 95% about problems and 5% about solutions. Sethi asked her to picture the reverse. She said it would feel like the pride they feel about the house decision, with more celebrating, less worry, and more time with Jake and the kids instead of being "trapped to the spreadsheet."

Recalculating the fixed costs

Going line by line, Sethi found costs missing from the totals. Preschool at $1,266 a month (with one school year left before public school) wasn't counted. Adding it pushed fixed costs up 10 points, to 60%. A joint account that Mia and her ex-husband each pay into for the older kids' larger expenses, such as clothes, was also missing. With it included, fixed costs reached 64%. Mia said she could feel her hands get hot. Sethi said he wasn't feeling that pressure at all. To him it was a puzzle to solve, and they "certainly do not have a lack of money." At 64%, though, he said he would be more directive.

Several changes followed. Utilities of $409 were unusually high, partly because they were still paying to run a broken hot tub they hadn't figured out how to disconnect. Sethi told them to fix that. The $459 treadmill payment, at 0% interest, ends in three months, so he zeroed it out, bringing fixed costs to 60%. Groceries and gas were grouped together only because both go on the credit card. Sethi said gas belongs with the car, since car costs should include everything. He mentioned that his own $350 car payment once turned out to cost over $1,000 a month once parking and other costs were added. The couple estimated groceries at about $1,200 and thought $800 was realistic. Sethi initially set the combined line to $1,100, which brought fixed costs to 57%. Subscriptions for TV services went from $315 to $200. Both said they didn't care much about them and that the cut was "easy."

Jake asked how to actually stick to a grocery number. Sethi said most Americans don't shop to a number. People can withdraw $200 a week in cash or simply track against a weekly figure on their phone. From what he has observed, people who hit grocery targets tend to eat the same things repeatedly and follow a meal plan, and usually one person does most of the shopping because that person knows the numbers.

Sethi then pointed out that they cut costs with almost no resistance, which he said is unusual. Jake said he does it for the greater good of the family and financial stability. Mia said it's easy because it's hypothetical: when she actually wants a pair of shoes, it's different. Sethi suggested cutting also feels comfortable because it's all they were ever taught. He told the audience that for Mia and Jake, "being good with money" seems to mean not spending. Cuts alone would send them back to that comfort zone, so they also needed to think critically about big decisions such as their pension, their 529s, and their guilt-free spending.

The pension as a safety net

The couple explained their pension. Under a "rule of 88," once years of service plus age reaches 88, they receive 80% of the average monthly income from their top three earning years for life. Having contributed since age 21, they expect to be eligible somewhere between 54 and 60. Mia asked whether 80% would be enough in 20 years given inflation. Sethi said he didn't know the details but was "willing to bet" their pension adjusts for inflation, as many do, and suggested they check. They estimated their final salaries at about $140,000 each. Sethi called this remarkable and noted that few people have pensions like this anymore. He described how pensions were more common in their parents' era, and how companies later shifted the burden to workers through 401(k)s and IRAs. By the time the couple retires, he said, the house will be paid off, college saving will be finished, and their costs will be much lower.

As for the $700 monthly savings, they had started with a round $1,000 and lowered it without much reasoning. Sethi then showed them that with the adjustments, they were spending more than they earned each month. That explained why their savings were shrinking and why money felt scarce.

Interrogating the 529 "universal truth"

The biggest remaining line, apart from the pension, was $2,700 a month into the kids' 529s. Mia explained her reasoning. Her parents taught her to avoid debt above all, and they helped her graduate without any. College costs now seem outrageous to her: where students might once have borrowed around $60,000, she now pictures $100,000 to $150,000. She also acknowledged a pay-it-forward element. Asked whether they would still save for 529s on $75,000 a year, Jake said they would try. His own view is that it was done for him and he wants his kids to have the same advantage, and that the "safe" path he was taught is to go to school and get a job that pays. As they talked, he said, the position got harder to defend. It was "an agreed upon truth" they had never looked into. Mia later called it "this ghost telling us that we have to do that."

They estimated the 529s would grow to about $98,000 to $100,000 for the oldest, who starts college in four years, around $130,000 for the middle child, and possibly about $170,000 for the youngest. Mia asked whether that was the right amount and admitted she had never thought about it. Sethi said it was shocking that the largest line on the sheet besides the pension had never been questioned, and that it was no wonder they felt guilty without knowing the basic numbers. He suggested they might even like guilt because it is familiar. He also observed that right after the momentous decision to sell the house, they moved the money elsewhere without stopping to ask what was right.

In a segment addressed to viewers, Sethi described "I need to pay for my kids' college" as a nice but simplistic idea. Parents promise to sacrifice everything without knowing how much, where the kids will go, or having talked with them. He argued this isn't about loving your kids but about thinking critically about one of the biggest financial decisions in your life. He urged parents to calculate different scenarios, from giving nothing to giving a great deal, and to fit the decision into their rich life.

Family money scripts

Mia remembers her parents' message as "do not spend." As a child she wanted to spend her babysitting money right away and always felt she was doing something wrong. Her parents are "true minimalists" who can eat the same meal forever. They also took the family traveling and paid for her college, both things Mia wants to do for her own children. The contradiction she felt was that saving seemed effortless for them and impossible for her. Her parents are still married, still just as disciplined, spending more on travel in retirement, and enjoying it "a thousand percent." What she wishes they had done is explain their trade-offs. She saw spreadsheets and tracking, but never heard reasoning like "we could buy this, but we're not because we want to travel." Jake described her parents as a methodical unit. He always knows exactly what meal they'll serve when he visits, which Sethi called "a huge reveal" that they have a system, even if it isn't visible.

Jake's parents were supportive and upper-middle class, "probably towards wealthy" for their small Midwest town, but they never discussed money. They paid for all of his college, and he says he didn't really apply himself until about 25. His father has mentioned an inheritance, but the amount is "a mythical number" that has never been discussed in 38 years. Jake said he has taken on the pattern of avoidance: "shut the door, pretend it doesn't exist." Mia said she copied her mother, who spent weekends doing a spreadsheet, without knowing what the spreadsheet was for. Sethi found it ironic that Jake may inherit a large sum while being afraid of money, and that he risks passing the same avoidance on to his own children. He argued that generational messages don't fade on their own. Most parents did their best but didn't know what they were doing with money, and today's parents have far more free resources available.

Feelings versus decisions

Mia said that even though she knows college doesn't have to be 100% funded, the thought of lowering it makes her anxious and guilty, because they both value taking care of family. Trading anxiety for guilt, she said, doesn't sound better. Sethi's response was "so what?" Feeling guilty doesn't mean you have to follow that feeling. You can acknowledge it, identify the invisible script behind it, set it aside, and instead follow a decision "informed by numbers, by connection, by conversation, and by a rich life vision."

Mia stopped him there. She said it was a major shift in her thinking: she hadn't realized how much she was letting feelings rather than decisions control their money. Sethi said that in his experience, more than 95% of the time people make life-changing financial decisions on feelings alone. His recommended order is the rich life vision first, then the numbers, and then the feelings.

A rich life vision, and "playing not to lose"

Asked for their rich life vision, both said they want not to track every penny, and to feel about their overall finances the way they feel about the house decision. Jake said that during this conversation his vision had shifted toward being confident in their decisions and using data. He pointed out that at work they insist on data rather than opinions, yet at home they rely on feelings. Sethi told them they had been "playing not to lose." Pressed for specifics, Jake named the landscaping and the hot tub. Mia agreed. Jake said reading Sethi's book was the first time he had ever thought about what he was saving for. Before that, he just wanted to save and not spend.

Sethi said that if you don't create a vision for your money, one gets created for you, typically a big house and a big car, which is what happened to them at first. They unwound that but never replaced it with a new vision. Mia's defaults became following her parents' rules and putting everything toward the kids. Asked to name the problem in one sentence, Mia said they don't have the money to do it the way they're spending, and it's forcing them to take from savings. Jake said they must stop drawing from savings and would like to add more, likely by reducing the 529s. Mia said they need to decide on a college amount and then fit the rest of the budget around it. Jake again wished for someone to give him a plan to execute, "a Midwest work ethic." Sethi said he never accepts that role, because people follow through more when they have done the thinking themselves.

Reframing the college conversation with the kids

Mia said they had told their 14-year-old that they could help with a public university, and that anything else would require scholarships or loans, adding that he should avoid debt. Sethi called this the typical lecture parents of their generation gave. He offered an alternative framing: tell the kids how hard the parents worked to save, what it took, and how much education has meant to them as teachers. Then present the money, using $75,000 as his example figure, as a gift. The child, as an adult, can decide how to use it, whether for the first year or spread over four, and the parents trust them to decide well. The couple said this version makes the child the decision-maker, shows confidence, and treats the child as a collaborator. Mia noticed it includes exactly what she wished her own parents had done: explain how they did it.

Sethi argued that many parents believe they must shield their kids from money and that this is wrong. Every trip to the grocery store or department store, and the college decision itself, is a chance to talk about money. That requires the parents to get good at money first. He added that kids love it when parents admit mistakes and say they had to go learn this themselves.

Mia said she had a much bigger emotional response to the idea of empowering her kids with money than she ever had to saving for college, which had no feeling attached. She joked that in 20 years she doesn't want her kids flying to California to have Sethi's kid teach them about money. Sethi said that because both of them are teachers, the idea connects deeply, and that based on what Mia had said, giving $30,000 and teaching the kids might be more empowering than giving $120,000. Jake said his mind was "blown." At his school he talks about "high expectation with high support," yet with money he had operated on feelings with low expectations. He described strong cognitive dissonance and said it might be the first time he had felt hopeful about money. Mia agreed: "We just weren't making decisions."

During a break, with Sethi out of the room, the cameras kept rolling. The couple planned to disconnect the hot tub. They talked about telling the kids the family will eat mostly the same healthy meals each week, with a set budget any child can use to plan a different meal. They agreed they need to talk to the kids about money. Mia reflected that her old approach of looking at the budget and concluding "we're spending too much" was itself a feeling, with no "how, where, what." She also liked the idea of telling the kids the money is a gift and showing them the account whenever they want to see it.

Rebuilding the plan

Back at the numbers, Mia proposed deciding on a firm amount for each child and then building everything else around it. Her gut said $75,000, and she was open to less. Jake had been thinking $50,000. He suggested $60,000, and they settled on $65,000. When Jake worried it was arbitrary, Mia said it didn't matter, "because at least we decided." Her ex-husband will contribute $15,000 for each of the two older children toward that total. Asked to guess the required monthly savings, Mia said $2,300 and Jake said $1,900. Sethi's team's rough calculation was about $1,600 a month, roughly half the previous amount, largely because the youngest has many more years to go. He noted the figure depends on several variables and should be calculated carefully at home.

They then finished the adjustments. Gas was split out at about $200 and moved to the car line, bringing it to $609. Groceries went to $800. Miscellaneous was cut in half to $600. Fixed costs fell to 52%, leaving 9%, or $1,216, for guilt-free spending. Sethi then used what he called the CSP's greatest strength, projecting ahead, and zeroed out preschool as it will be in a year. Fixed costs fell to 43%, and guilt-free spending rose to 18%, about $2,400 a month. Mia said that felt like the rich life.

Their first choice was more savings. Mia wanted six months of liquid cash, which Sethi put at roughly $30,000 to $35,000, so they doubled the monthly contribution from $700 to $1,400. Of the remaining $1,700, they chose house projects over travel for now, putting $750 a month into a "house" category in place of vacations. A hot tub, estimated at about $6,000, would take about a year. Both said they were fine with that, which Sethi called an amazing answer. He noted that many people balk at waiting, but they'll be that much older anyway and might as well have the money, with no debt.

That left about $1,000 a month for eating out and other guilt-free spending. Sethi asked them to stay comfortably under it. For eating out, one of the few variable costs he recommends tracking, he suggested the same approach as groceries. Set a monthly figure, work out what each outing can cost, even down to entrées and drinks, and plan in advance where they'll go. Many people find that boring, he said, but knowing Friday is pizza lets you enjoy it twice: once looking forward to it and once being there. It trades some serendipity for the lack of worry they both said they wanted.

Is this their rich life?

Asked whether the plan reflects their rich life, Jake said yes. Not pulling from savings is part of it, and he was already mentally designing how he'd track it. Mia said she had been "confusing saving for college with preparing my kids for the future," and those aren't the same. Sethi agreed that simply giving kids a lot of money helps them avoid some debt but doesn't teach them much, and noted that both of them are examples of that.

On what surprised them, Jake said it was how much he was perpetuating his own childhood patterns and how, because he was scared, he had gone against everything he believes about using data, building capacity, and trusting kids. He said he had been "the worst version of myself around money" and felt more comfortable digging in now that there was a goal. Mia said it was the distinction between giving kids money and preparing them for it, and that she felt "so much lighter." Neither expects resentment going forward. Jake said the hard work now has a purpose beyond a big lump of money they had never thought about. Mia said decisions they make together leave no room for resentment. Jake added that his resistance had come from a lack of clarity and understanding.

The follow-ups

In a first follow-up video, Mia said her biggest surprise was how many unwritten rules had been guiding her. Jake said he felt much better even while saving less for college, because they now agree they want to teach their kids about money, not just give it to them. His takeaway was that he will always have to think about money no matter how much they earn. He used to believe earning more would make the worries go away, and he's now fine with that because they have a purpose and a process. They reported auditing subscriptions and regular expenses and deciding confidently what to keep and what to stop.

In a second update, they had just returned from a vacation Jake said he actually enjoyed because for the first time he knew where the money was coming from and how much they could spend. They had held two money meetings, which Mia described as the first money conversations of their relationship that didn't feel contentious. She said they weren't necessarily spending less, but they were questioning why they spent and choosing more intentionally. Jake said the lesson for him is that they have to be consistent and can't skip things, and joked that he's still grumpy, but at least he now knows where the money is coming from.