Breaking Free: How Mobile Money Is Disrupting Traditional Finance
Imagine you walk into a store, skip the wallet, tap your phone, and all your bills, transfers, even savings are handled from your palm. No bank branch, no big paperwork. For many people around the world, that is already a reality. The rise of mobile money platforms—like M-Pesa, MTN MoMo, OPay, PalmPay, Wave—has changed how people send, receive, and use money. What was once “nice to have” in developing economies is now spilling into global remittance, cross-border payments, and pushing incumbents in richer markets to adapt.
This post walks through:
- What mobile money is (and isn’t)
- Why it’s booming in Africa and Asia
- What we see in Canada & the USA so far: opportunities, obstacles, comparisons
- What the future might hold (for users, businesses, regulators)
What Exactly is Mobile Money?
Mobile money broadly refers to payment and financial services delivered via mobile phones, often through:
- Mobile wallets: storing value, doing peer-to-peer (P2P) transfers, bill payments, etc.
- Agent networks: physical agents who allow “cash in” (you deposit cash and get electronic value) and “cash out” to convert electronic value back to physical cash.
- Integration with other financial services: loans, savings, insurance tied to mobile money accounts.
These systems are often built by telecom operators, fintech firms, or partnerships, especially in regions where many people don’t have bank accounts, or access to banks is costly.
Key features that differentiate mobile money systems from typical bank-based digital wallets include:
- Simpler onboarding (often minimal documentation)
- Heavy use of agents, especially in rural or underserved areas
- Often offline or basic-phone compatible (SMS or USSD instead of just apps)
The Phenomenal Growth: Global Trends & Key Players
Before zooming into North America, it helps to see the bigger picture.
- Globally, the mobile payments market was valued at USD 88.5 billion in 2024, and is expected to reach around USD 587.5 billion by 2030, growing at roughly 38 % compound annual growth rate (CAGR). (Grand View Research)
- As of 2023-24, there are over 2.1 billion registered mobile money accounts globally, and hundreds of millions of active users. (Payments Cards and Mobile)
- Africa remains the epicenter of mobile money’s success. Platforms like M-Pesa (Kenya, Tanzania, Ghana etc.), Wave (Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire…), MTN MoMo, OPay, PalmPay etc., handle many billions in transactions. Their value isn’t just sending money: it’s financial inclusion, small business support, micro-loans, savings, etc. (AZA Finance)
Canada & USA: Where We Stand
Mobile money in the sense used in many African and Asian markets isn’t fully the same in North America. But many of the same pressures, benefits, and challenges are emerging.
Statistics & Growth in Canada
- The Canada mobile wallet & payments market was valued at about USD 1.39 billion in 2024; it’s projected to reach USD ~20.48 billion by 2030, with a CAGR of about 55.9 %. (MarkNtel Advisors)
- Another report puts the entire Canada mobile payments market at USD 2.39 billion in 2025, growing to USD ≈ 20.28 billion by 2030, with nearly 39 % CAGR. (Mordor Intelligence)
- Yet adoption is uneven: for example, a Bank of Canada survey found that only about 10 % of Canadians over 15 used a virtual wallet in 2020; in 2023, about 16 % of adults had used mobile payments. (Bank of Canada)
In the USA
- While specific mobile money platforms like M-Pesa, Wave etc. are not native here, digital wallets (Apple Pay, Google Pay), P2P apps (Venmo, Zelle, Cash App) dominate many of the same use cases.
- More than half of Americans claim they use digital wallets more often than cash or physical cards. (Tech.co)
- Transaction volumes are huge, especially remote/digital commerce and contactless payments post-COVID. Fraud, regulation, user experience are all coming into sharper focus.
Why Mobile Money Is So Appealing
Here are the main positive drivers:
| Benefit | What It Offers | Why It Matters Especially in Canada/USA |
|---|---|---|
| Convenience & speed | Instant transfers, fast checkouts, peer-to-peer mirroring cash but without physical presence | Especially for younger users, gig workers, online shopping, and inflation of service expectations. |
| Financial inclusion | Reaching people with limited or no banking access; smaller transactions; avoiding high bank fees | Immigrants, rural populations, underserved communities often face friction; mobile tools help lower entry barrier. |
| Cost savings | Lower infrastructure cost; less branch-based labor; cheaper remittance options | Cross-border payments especially can be costly; mobile money tools can reduce fees. |
| Innovation & competition | New entrants push established banks and payments systems to improve; more features (loans, savings, insurance) | Encourages better UX, better pricing, more options for consumers. |
| Data and digital integration | Payment data, consumption patterns, loyalty, inclusion in digital ecosystems | Retailers, fintechs can tailor offers; governments can better design policies. |
The Drawbacks, Hurdles & Risks
It isn’t all smooth sailing. There are very real negatives, challenges, or at least areas that demand care.
- Regulatory & compliance issues: Anti-money laundering (AML), know your customer (KYC) requirements, consumer protection. Operating “mobile wallet plus agent network” is often more regulated than pure digital wallets.
- Security & fraud: As usage rises, so do fraud risks; credential theft, SIM swap, phishing, etc.
- Infrastructure gaps: Agent networks are expensive in low-volume areas. Even in Canada, many rural businesses still don’t accept mobile wallet checkouts or contactless payments.
- Trust & behavior: Habit is strong. Many people prefer cash, physical cards; some distrust digitization, or feel excluded if they don’t have latest phone, or lack digital literacy.
- Fees & costs: For some mobile money systems, the cost (especially for cash-out, or for transfers via agents) can be non-trivial. In many developing markets, these fees fall disproportionately on poorer users.
- Fragmentation & interoperability: Many mobile money systems are local; sending money across networks (or countries) often involves high fees or slow processes. Seamless cross-border or inter-platform transfers are often missing.
How M-Pesa, Opay, PalmPay, Wave, MTN MoMo etc. Compare with North American Systems
While the giants (M-Pesa, MoMo) are thriving in Africa and parts of Asia, their presence in the USA/Canada is more limited or indirect. Here are some comparisons:
| Feature | Stronger in African/Asian Mobile Money (e.g. M-Pesa, MoMo, Wave) | Stronger / dominant in USA/Canada models |
|---|---|---|
| Agent network & cash in / cash out | Very pervasive: many corner shops or small vendors double as agents. | Much less so: most systems assume bank cards, bank accounts; cash-in/out is via ATM or banks. |
| Unbanked user base | Very large; mobile money often substitutes for bank entirely. | Smaller in relative terms; more people have bank accounts, though gaps remain. |
| Feature set bundled | Mobile wallets often include savings, micro-loans, insurance directly connected to the service. | Often “wallets” are more limited; micro-loans via fintechs or credit cards; insurance via separate providers. |
| Regulatory burden | Varying; often more permissive in agent licensing but evolving. | Stricter regulation; heavy compliance; more friction to add or expand cross-border services. |
| Cross-border remittances | Many services are central to remittances (sending to/from diaspora). | There is demand; services exist (Wise, Western Union), but often higher cost, slower, or less integrated. |
Is “Mobile Money” Gaining Ground in Canada & USA Like It Did in Africa?
There are signs, though the form looks different.
- Remittance Channels: Diaspora communities in the USA and Canada who send money home sometimes use mobile money networks abroad to receive transfers. For example, people in Canada can send funds that end up in an M-Pesa wallet in Kenya. (Wise)
- Demand for alternative financial services: Fintechs are offering more “wallet-like” services: cash-management, peer-to-peer transfer, QR payments, mobile-first banks.
- Regulators & infrastructure catching up: More contactless payments, more merchant acceptance of digital wallets, more investment in payment rails. In Canada, for instance, the explosion in acceptance of contactless cards paved a path for mobile wallets. But usage of pure mobile money (as in “agent + wallet without bank”) remains low. (Bank of Canada)
- Cross-border operators: Companies like Wise, Sling Money allow transfers to mobile money wallets abroad, enabling that “mobile money” usage even from USA/Canada. (Wise)
What Needs to Change for True Mobile Money Adoption North of the Border
If mobile money services like M-Pesa/MoMo etc. are to become more than niche or remittance tools in the USA and Canada, a few things would need to happen:
- Agent / physical network expansion, especially for cash in / cash out. Without that, many people still reliant on cash or physical services will be excluded.
- Regulatory clarity and supportive policy: Licensing, compliance, consumer protection laws need to adapt to mobile money’s hybrid nature (digital + physical agents).
- Lower friction for users: Simplified KYC, easier onboarding, inclusive digital literacy, affordability of necessary devices/internet.
- Interoperability: Between mobile money services, between banks and mobile money, across borders; so fees dropped, speed improved.
- Trust and security: Ensuring systems are resilient against fraud, transparent pricing, good customer support.
- Cultural adoption & awareness: People need to see clear benefits (cost, convenience), see that services are safe, and that using mobile money does not mean losing autonomy or security.
Possible Future Scenarios: What Could Happen Next
- Hybrid Models: Perhaps we’ll see mobile money providers partner with banks or telecoms in North America to offer “agent-lite” models; fewer physical agents, but more retail partnerships, or mobile units.
- Super-apps that combine payments, remittances, micro-savings, insurance etc., especially targeted at immigrant communities.
- Cross-border Payments as Core Use Case: For many users in Canada/USA who send money home, mobile money abroad becomes a key channel; services will optimize for speed, low fees, transparency.
- Financial Inclusion Push: Governments might promote mobile money services as part of inclusion strategies, especially for rural, remote, or low income / underbanked people.
- RegTech / Identity Tech innovations: Better ways of verifying identity, reducing fraud, enabling compliance without too much friction.
Conclusion: Is Mobile Money Coming for Traditional Banks?
In short: Yes—and not just “coming”, it already is making waves. But in the USA and Canada, the version of mobile money we get will likely look different than in Kenya or Ghana. It will be shaped by stronger regulation, higher expectations around privacy and fraud prevention, and more mature banking infrastructures.
For individual users, the promise is real: cheaper and faster remittances; small-scale financial tools in your phone; better convenience. For businesses: opportunity to tap underserved markets, reduce friction, integrate payments deeply. For regulators and policymakers: balancing innovation and protection is key.
If you live in Canada or the USA and you haven’t seriously experimented with a mobile wallet, transfer app, or remittance via mobile money service, it’s worth exploring. The change is already here—and it’s accelerating.
FAQs
Here are common questions people often ask about mobile money, especially relative to North America.
- What’s the difference between “mobile money” and “digital wallet”?
A digital wallet (Apple Pay, Google Pay, PayPal, etc.) generally holds payment card info, lets you pay online or via NFC on your phone. Mobile money (as in many African markets) often includes an account stored on your phone, agent networks to deposit/withdraw cash, and sometimes functions like savings, loans. The infrastructure & usage are broader. - Can I use services like M-Pesa, MoMo, OPay, Wave etc. from the USA or Canada?
You may not have local accounts for many of those systems, but you can send money from the USA or Canada that ends up on those wallets. For example, using services like Wise, Western Union, or Sling Money, you can send funds to M-Pesa wallets abroad. (Wise) - Are these services safe? What about fraud?
There are security features: PINs, sometimes biometrics, encryption. But risks exist—fraud, phishing, SIM swap etc. It depends heavily on implementation, regulation, and user behavior. Always check service’s reputation, fee transparency, and protection offered. - Why haven’t mobile money services become massive in Canada/USA like in Africa?
Some reasons: more people already have bank accounts; fewer people are unbanked; heavy regulation; cash infrastructure (banks, ATMs) is stronger; cultural and behavioural norms favour traditional banking/credit; less need for “agent networks” in many urban areas. - What’s the cost of sending money via mobile money vs traditional remittances?
It varies a lot. Sometimes mobile money abroad (e.g. in Africa) has lower fees than traditional remittance via bank transfers. But there may be currency conversion cost, intermediary fees, minimum amounts, or “cash-out” fees. The best deals often come from specialized remittance/mobile money-aware providers.
![# 50/30/20 Rule: Does It Still Work in 2025? *Unlocking the budget blueprint that still bites—and where it flops* --- ## Introduction: The Budget Rule with Staying Power Remember the day you sat down with your paycheck, GPS set for financial freedom, and thought: “If only I had a simple rule to follow”? That’s where the 50/30/20 Rule comes in. First popularised by Elizabeth Warren in *All Your Worth*, the rule says: budget **50 %** of your after-tax income to “needs”, **30 %** to “wants”, and **20 %** to “savings & debt”. ([Investopedia][1]) In theory, it’s beautifully simple: a tri-bucket system that gives you structure *and* freedom. But it’s 2025. Costs have soared in many regions of the United States and Canada. Housing, groceries, insurance, and digital-living are no longer stable line items. So: **Is the 50/30/20 rule still realistic?** Does it still *work* for you—whether you’re in Toronto, New York, Vancouver or Miami? This post will walk you through: * What the rule is and why it worked. * What has changed in the financial landscape since its heyday. * Where the rule still holds strong—and where it simply fails. * How to adapt the rule for 2025 with practical tweaks. * A clear comparison table for quick review. * A strong conclusion and **5 FAQs** to clear the smoke. Let’s dive in. --- ## What the 50/30/20 Rule Actually Says Before we judge it, let’s make sure the baseline is clear. | Bucket | Percentage | Description | Examples (US/Canada) | | -------------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- | | Needs | ~50 % | Essential costs: housing, utilities, groceries, transport, insurance, minimum debt payments. ([Investopedia][1]) | Mortgage or rent, groceries, car payment, insurance premium | | Wants | ~30 % | Discretionary spending: dining out, travel, hobbies, upgrades. ([LendEDU][2]) | Netflix subscriptions, weekend trips, new phone case | | Savings & Debt | ~20 % | Savings, investments, extra debt repayments beyond minimums. ([Nasdaq][3]) | Emergency fund, RRSP/401(k), paying down student loan early | **Why it caught on:** * It’s simple. * Easy to explain and remember. * Gives you both structure and freedom (you still have 30% for fun). * Helps protect your future by carving out savings. **Initial appeal in Canada & USA:** * With moderate income and moderate cost-living zones, many found it achievable. * It offered a roadmap without becoming overly restrictive. * It balanced living in the now and preparing for tomorrow. --- ## The 2025 Financial Landscape: What’s Changed? If you flick back to 2006 (when the rule was popularised), you’ll realise the world looks different. Here are key shifts: **1. Housing & Needs Costs Have Skyrocketed** * Cities like Vancouver, Toronto, New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles see rent/mortgage taking >30-40 % (sometimes >50 %) of after-tax income. * Utilities, insurance (health, car) and transportation costs have steadily risen. * Some experts argue the “needs” bucket should now be closer to 60 % in many markets. ([Nasdaq][3]) **2. Income Instability and the Gig Economy** * More people in contract work, side hustles, uncertain income streams. * Variable income makes fixed-percentage budgeting more challenging (you might have lean months). * Budgeting needs to be more flexible than static rule. ([Medium][4]) **3. Wants Have Broadened and Evolved** * Some “wants” are now quasi-“needs”: good internet for remote work, mental-health apps, upskilling platforms. ([Medium][4]) * Consumer behaviour changed: experiences over things, subscription fatigue, digital everything. * Thus, the 30% “wants” bucket may either shrink or take too much depending on your lifestyle. **4. Savings & Debt Burden Are Heavier** * Many are entering adulthood with student debt, auto debt, rental premiums. * Emergency funds have become more important, cushion for job loss or unexpected events. * The 20% savings target may be difficult if debt payments and “needs” are already high. ([LendEDU][2]) **5. Geographic Cost Variation is More Pronounced** * What works in rural America or smaller Canadian cities might fail in major urban centres. * One size doesn’t fit all; the rule’s rigid percentages may need local adaptation. Given all these shifts, it’s not surprising some financial professionals are asking: “Does the 50/30/20 rule still work in 2025?” --- ## Where the 50/30/20 Rule Still Works – And Where It Doesn’t Let’s go through the positives **and** the negatives—so you can decide how it stacks for you. ### ✅ What Works (Positives) * **Great beginner framework**: If you’ve never budgeted before, 50/30/20 is a simple start. Helps you see categories and gives you direction. ([Nasdaq][3]) * **Encourages savings and debt-repayments**: By reserving a savings bucket, it forces future-orientation, not just living for today. * **Fosters discretionary spending room**: The “wants” bucket lets you breathe; you’re not stuck in austerity mode. * **Easy to understand and communicate**: Whether you’re budgeting solo or as a couple, it sets a shared language. ### ❌ What Fails (Negatives) * **Unrealistic in high-cost living areas**: Many residents spend much more than 50% on “needs” already—leaving too little for wants/savings. ([Auswide Bank][5]) * **Rigid percentages may not fit variable incomes**: For freelancers or side-hustlers, monthly income fluctuates—three buckets may need monthly adjustment. * **Oversimplifies complex financial goals**: If you are aggressively saving for retirement, a house down-payment or paying off heavy debt, 20% might be too low. * **Doesn’t account for regional, age or life-stage nuances**: If you’re young, mid-career, retiree or living in rural vs urban — your optimal split might be very different. * **Ignores inflation and rising fixed costs dynamic**: The rule was created in a more stable cost era; it may feel “out-of-date” when grocery prices, rent, insurance all keep rising. In short: The 50/30/20 rule still **can** work—but you must treat it as a guide, not a mandate. You’ll likely need to adapt it to **your** reality. --- ## How to Adapt the 50/30/20 Rule for 2025 – Customisation Guide If you like the tri-bucket logic but find the rigid numbers don’t match your world, here’s how to adapt it. ### Step-by-Step Adaptation 1. **Track your after-tax income** * For USA/Canada: Net take-home pay (after federal/state/provincial tax, retirement contributions, etc.). * If income varies (freelancer/gig): compute a 12-month average or use a “lean month” average. 2. **List your actual ‘needs’ costs** * Housing (rent/mortgage + insurance + utilities) * Transportation (car payments, insurance, fuel/public transit) * Food/groceries * Minimum debt payments + essential insurance/healthcare * For 2025: don’t forget “internet” or “work-from-home tech” if essential * If sum > 50 % of income, you’ll know you need to tweak. 3. **Review your ‘wants’ and define them** * Dining out, subscriptions, travel, hobbies, upgrades, shopping * Distinguish “nice-to-have” vs “must-have for wellbeing” * Decide how you want to trade: Is your 30% realistic? Should you shrink it? 4. **Define your ‘savings & debt’ bucket** * Emergency fund (3-6 months expenses) * Intermediate/long-term savings (RRSP, 401(k), TFSA, etc) * Extra debt repayments (higher interest than minimum) * If you have aggressive goals (buy house, early retirement, etc) you may want >20%. 5. **Adjust your percentages in a flexible way** * Example alternatives: * 60/25/15 if your “needs” are high. ([Auswide Bank][5]) * 40/30/30 if your needs are low and you want higher savings. * Use a tiered model: When income increases, shift extra to savings rather than wants. 6. **Automate and monitor monthly** * Set automatic transfers for savings bucket. * Use budgeting apps (Mint, YNAB, etc) to track wants/leaks. * Revisit every 6-12 months or when your life changes (job change, baby, moving city, etc). ### Example Adapted Splits for North America Here are some *realistic* adapted splits you might consider, depending on your scenario: | Scenario | Needs % | Wants % | Savings & Debt % | Notes | | ------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ---------------- | ------------------------------------------ | | Urban high-cost city (USA) | 60 | 25 | 15 | When rent/mortgage and essentials dominate | | Mid-income, moderate costs | 50 | 30 | 20 | Classic split suits here | | High savings focus (e.g., FIRE) | 40 | 30 | 30 | Needs low, savings high | | Variable income (freelancer) | 55 | 20 | 25 | Slightly conservative with wants | | Low income / high debt burden | 65 | 10 | 25 | Shrink wants, prioritise savings/debt | ### Tips for USA & Canada Context * In the **USA**: tax withholding, health insurance costs, and retirement savings (401(k), IRA) can impact net income and “savings” bucket. * In **Canada**: consider RRSPs, TFSAs, provincial healthcare, and higher housing costs in some provinces; cost of living in cities like Vancouver/Toronto may push “needs” above 50%. * Use local cost-of-living calculators to check whether your “needs” bucket is realistic for your city/region. * If you carry student debt, high interest rate credit cards or car loans, treat “extra debt payments” as part of your savings bucket — even if it’s technically debt. --- ## The Verdict: Does It Still Work in 2025? Yes — **with caveats**. The 50/30/20 rule remains a **valuable framework**, especially as a starting point or simple benchmark. But **no**, it doesn’t work *out-of-the-box* for everyone in 2025, especially in high cost-living areas or for variable income earners. Here’s a summary of the judgment: * **Works well** if: * You live in a moderate cost-area, or your “needs” are controlled. * Your income is stable and sufficient to cover essentials. * You are comfortable with moderate savings and want a simple plan. * **Needs adjustment** if: * You’re in a high-cost city where “needs” already eat up 60%+. * You earn income irregularly or your financial goals demand higher savings. * You’re in a life stage (e.g., aggressive debt pay-off, early retirement) requiring a different split. In short: Think of 50/30/20 as **the baseline compass**, not the final map. Use it to orient yourself, then customise. --- ## Practical Action Plan: Make It Work for *You* Here’s a step-by-step plan to put into action this week: 1. **Calculate your actual net (after-tax) income** for the last 3 months. 2. **List all your “needs” items** and total them up. 3. **Check what percentage** your “needs” are of that net income. * If >50%, you’ll need to restructure. 4. **List your “wants”** and see if the 30% bucket is realistic (or too high/low). 5. **Define your “savings & debt” goals** for the next year (emergency fund, retirement, house, debt-free). 6. **Select an adapted split** that better fits your situation (use table earlier). 7. **Automate transfers**: set up auto-transfer to savings/investments and auto-payments for debt. 8. **Review monthly**: especially if your income or circumstances change. 9. **Reassess annually**: cost of living, housing market, inflation all change—so should your budget. 10. **Remember flexibility is key**: The goal isn’t perfection. The goal is progress, consistency, and awareness. --- ## Conclusion: A Rule with Age —but Not Inflexibility The 50/30/20 rule has stood the test of time because it offers clarity, balance and simplicity. It still **works** in 2025—but only if you treat it as a **guideline**, not a fixed formula carved in stone. With costs, lifestyles and incomes evolving in North America, you must adjust the percentages, tailor the buckets to your reality, and ensure your budget reflects your goals (whether that’s owning a home, retiring early, or simply living with less financial stress). By doing so, you harness the power of the rule — the structure — while maintaining the flexibility needed for modern life in the USA and Canada. Use it as your launching pad, refine it and let it serve **you**, not the other way around. --- ## FAQs **Q1. Is the 50/30/20 rule based on gross or net income?** It is based on your **after-tax (net)** income—what you actually take home. ([LendEDU][2]) **Q2. What if I’m earning very little and cannot make the 20 % savings target?** That’s quite common. The key is to start with what you *can* save and gradually increase the savings rate as income rises or debt lowers. The framework remains helpful even at 5-10 %. ([LendEDU][2]) **Q3. If housing costs are more than 50 % of my income, should I abandon the rule?** Not necessarily. You should **adjust** the split. For example, increasing “needs” to 60% and reducing “wants” or “savings” temporarily might help you stay balanced. ([Nasdaq][3]) **Q4. Does this budget rule apply if I have irregular income (freelancer/gig worker)?** Yes—but you’ll need to adapt. Use a conservative estimate of monthly income (e.g., average of last 6–12 months). Consider building a larger buffer in “savings” during higher-income months. The fixed-percentage model becomes more flexible. ([Medium][4]) **Q5. Are there better alternatives to 50/30/20 in 2025?** There are several alternatives: * A 60/30/10 split if essentials dominate your budget. ([New York Post][6]) * An 80/20 (“pay yourself first”) model if you dislike tracking. * Zero-based budgeting (every dollar has a job) if you want rigorous control. ([LendEDU][2]) The best model is the one you actually follow. --- **Want a free Excel or Google Sheet template of this adapted budget with formulas?** I can build one tailored to Canada & USA versions if you like. [1]: https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/022916/what-502030-budget-rule.asp?utm_source=chatgpt.com "The 50/30/20 Budget Rule Explained With Examples" [2]: https://lendedu.com/blog/50-30-20-rule/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "What Is the 50/30/20 Rule, and Can It Work for You in 2025?" [3]: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/does-50-30-20-budgeting-rule-still-really-work?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Does the 50/30/20 Budgeting Rule Still Really Work?" [4]: https://medium.com/%40whee.2013/the-50-30-20-rule-reimagined-modern-budgeting-for-the-2025-economy-3c7225363086?utm_source=chatgpt.com "“The 50/30/20 Rule Reimagined: Modern Budgeting for ..." [5]: https://www.auswidebank.com.au/news-blogs/articles/money-rules-that-still-make-sense-in-2025/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Money rules that still make sense in 2025" [6]: https://nypost.com/2024/03/19/why-60-30-10-budget-is-replacing-50-30-20-method-amid-inflation/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "You're budgeting wrong now - why the 50/30/20 method no longer works and how much you should save instead"](https://finanme.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/maxresdefault-2-2-300x300.jpg)
