• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

The Family Money Mentor

  • Start Here
  • Courses
    • Burn Rate Budget Spending Strategy
    • Money $trategy $chool
  • Under 2
  • Blog
    • Know Your Numbers
    • Spending Strategy
    • Saving Strategy
    • Debt Strategy
    • Babies & Kids
    • Houses & Cars
  • About
in Under 2 · February 27, 2025

[Under 2] My 3-Part Cashflow Model

Read the Post »

in Under 2 · February 27, 2025

[Under 2] My 3-Part Cashflow Model

Welcome to Under 2, an email series delivering short insights to empower your money life – in 2 minutes or less.
Sign-up below to get Under 2 and other news from me landing in your inbox:

I don’t know if it’s my training as a physiologist or just the way my brain works, but I’ve always thought about money the way I was taught to understand the body: as a dynamic system in constant flux.

Your body manages complex, dynamic processes, like keeping blood sugar in balance, by regulating the rate of glucose flow in and out. When you eat, blood sugar rises, and your body adjusts by accelerating glucose clearance from the bloodstream into cells (via insulin), bringing blood sugar levels back to a safe range.

Weirdly, or amazingly, money works the same way. There’s always movement, and the key is creating stability by managing the flow rate.

To do this, we must think of our money as a series of “pools,” each with a different function and rate of change:

Spending account or credit card – This is your most active pool, where you must control outflow for everyday purchases. If you use a credit card, you can monitor and limit spending while keeping cash in your checking account longer and treating the monthly total as a single bill payment from checking (the next pool). If you prefer debit, a separate “spend” account can serve the same purpose. This pool fluctuates frequently, just like blood sugar, and needs frequent monitoring.

Checking account – This is your next most active pool, where money flows in (income) and out (bills, spending, saving/investing). It fluctuates with a monthly rhythm, so requires intermittent monitoring.

Savings account – This pool moves more slowly. Money flows in from regular savings and occasional windfalls (like tax refunds, bonuses, or extra biweekly paychecks), and out for bigger, less frequent expenses, like annual bills (e.g. insurance premiums, taxes), other irregular bills or spending (e.g. vacations, Christmas), and all those unexpected costs (e.g. repairs). This one requires a “1000-foot view” approach to management, typically looking at stability over an entire year, like getting your lipid panel checked.

The advantage of seeing your money this way is that you stop treating every single expense as an isolated decision. Instead, you focus on keeping each pool balanced and managing how money moves between them.

For example, if a home or car repair pops up, you ask, Which pool does this come from? If it’s a relatively larger and infrequent or unexpected expense, you pull from savings, ensuring you’re also funding savings throughout the year at a rate that supports your draw rate. If it’s absorbable as an everyday cost, it’s part of your spending pool or monthly/weekly “budget.”

When we think of managing money this way, budgeting becomes less about obsessing over every transaction and more about guiding the movement of money over time. You take control of the flow, adjust as needed, and create a system that works, just like a well-regulated body.

Mathematical modeling in the field of glucose homeostasis has a time-honored tradition… The natural idea underlying the use of mathematical models in physiology, as in other disciplines, is to employ the successful paradigm of physics for understanding, quantifying and predicting physiological processes.

Andrea Mari et al., Front Physiol, 2020.

(I argue such modeling is also well employed in personal finance!)

Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful… Since all models are wrong the scientist cannot obtain a “correct” one by excessive elaboration. On the contrary… he should seek an economical description of natural phenomena. Just as the ability to devise simple but evocative models is the signature of the great scientist, so overelaboration and overparameterization is often the mark of mediocrity.

George E.P. Box, PhD

(In other words, keep it simple.)

I hope you enjoyed this edition of Under 2, an email series designed to share quick bites of wisdom to empower your financial journey (while keeping it short). Be sure to sign-up below to get these messages in your inbox.

All for now,

Lindsey


Did you enjoy this message? Sign-up below to get Under 2 and other news from me landing in your inbox:

Previous Post: « [Under 2] Stretching Costs… Not Your Wallet
Next Post: [Under 2] Harder Is Not The Same As Better »

Primary Sidebar

About the author

family money mentor

Lindsey is a former research scientist and scientific writer who now works to empower the money lives of busy, modern families.

Recent Posts

  • [Under 2] Reset Your Standard, Reclaim Your Money
  • [Under 2] When Life Slows You Down
  • [Under 2] Why We Wait & What It Costs Us

Enroll In The Full Course

Enroll In The Full Course

Footer

Get your FREE Magic Monthly Number Workbook

save time, effort, and money with a simpler, smarter money plan (ahem, not purchase tracking and budget categories 🙄)

Take Me There!

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms

Copyright © 2025 · The Family Money Mentor · Design by Studio Mommy