From “Can I Have It?” to “It’ll Be Worth It”

What happened when my 5-year-old and 8-year-old practised managing their own money for 10 weeks.

"The biggest change isn't how much they've saved. It's that they're starting to explain why they made the decision."

Money conversations with kids rarely happen when you've planned them.

They happen in toy aisles. At checkout counters. On camping trips. When your child finds $20 inside an old book. When a toy they bought breaks.

Or when they announce:

"But I have money in my Spend Jar!"

That's one of the reasons I built Monty.

I wanted my kids to practise managing money while the decisions were still small enough to learn from.

So this summer, I started using Monty at home with my two boys, Simon and Mikey.

Each week we sit down for Monty O'Clock.

They split their allowance between their Spend, Save and Give jars. They look at their goals. We review purchases. We talk about decisions they made during the week.

At the beginning, I thought the biggest benefit might be teaching them to save.

Ten weeks later, that feels far too narrow.

The biggest change is how much more they are starting to think about money before, during and after they spend it.

Week 1: Give the money a job

Simon completed his first Monty O'Clock on July 25.

He split his first allowance between his jars and created his first purchase goal.

The next day, he wanted to do Monty again.

That was the first little signal.

He didn't need to understand budgeting terminology.

He was learning something much simpler:

I have money. I can decide where it goes. And what I decide changes what I can do later.

That was enough.

Mikey chooses a much bigger goal

Mikey's first Monty O'Clock went differently.

He chose a LEGO Arctic Explorer set worth more than $200.

I asked him whether he was sure.

It would take a long time.

He was sure.

That immediately made him think beyond his weekly allowance.

He remembered money sitting in his piggy bank.

Then he remembered money he had earned helping with Grandma's yard work.

Those were no longer unrelated piles of cash.

They were all part of his money.

We also went through his first Monty lesson together, and then he made another decision I hadn't expected.

He created a $10 giving goal for sharks.

He loves sharks.

Giving suddenly wasn't an abstract parent lesson about generosity.

It was connected to something he cared about.

Less than a week later, we hit the toy aisle

On July 30, we were at the grocery store when Mikey asked me, completely unprompted:

"Do I have enough money in my Spend Jar to buy a Hot Wheels car?"

That caught my attention.

Normally, wanting another toy at the grocery store could turn into an argument.

This time I didn't need to immediately say yes or no.

I told him he had enough money.

Then I asked:

"Is another car worth delaying your giving goal or your LEGO goal by a few dollars?"

He stood there going through the cars.

Then he decided there wasn't one he wanted enough.

He walked away.

I didn't tell him no.

He decided no.

Then Simon wanted one

Simon picked out a Hot Wheels car too.

He brought it toward checkout.

I reminded him:

"That's coming from your Spend Jar."

He thought about it.

Then he went back and put it away.

Again, the toy wasn't forbidden.

The trade-off was simply visible.

That created a very different conversation from:

"No. You already have enough toys."

Then came the pineapple

Simon also wanted a pineapple.

After returning the Hot Wheels car, he asked:

"Do I have to pay for the pineapple from my Spend Jar?"

I told him:

"No buddy. I'll buy the pineapple."

It sounds like a tiny question.

But he was beginning to think about:

• my money vs. family money
• personal wants vs. everyday purchases
• what I pay for vs. what Mom and Dad pay for

That was happening less than a week after his first Monty O'Clock.

The question was already changing

Before Monty, a common question was:

"Can you buy this for me?"

Now another question was appearing:

"Do I have enough money?"

Those questions are not the same.

"Can you buy this?" puts the entire decision on the parent.

"Do I have enough?" begins making the child responsible for part of the decision.

The parent doesn't disappear.

The role starts changing from gatekeeper to coach.

Progress became part of the reward

At the next Monty O'Clock, both boys split their allowances and reviewed their goals.

Simon saw his progress and reacted with an enthusiastic:

"YES!"

That reaction mattered.

Telling a young child that saving is important is abstract.

Seeing the thing he wants move closer is concrete.

He was experiencing:

I waited. I added more. Now I'm closer.

Progress itself was becoming rewarding.

Spending isn't the enemy

On August 5, Mikey was at Canadian Tire and asked how much money he had in his Spend Jar.

He wanted a PEZ dispenser.

This time, he decided the purchase was worth it.

We bought it.

When we got home, we reviewed the receipt and recorded the purchase from his Spend Jar.

The loop looked like this:

Want → Check → Decide → Buy → Record

That distinction matters.

Monty isn't designed to make children afraid of spending.

Spending is part of managing money.

The skill is learning to notice the decision.

Repetition started turning into a ritual

The following weeks weren't all dramatic.

The boys split their allowances.

They reviewed their jars.

They checked their goals.

They decided whether they still wanted them.

While camping, they bought Hubba Bubba gum, then returned to the trailer and recorded the purchase.

Another week, nothing particularly interesting happened at all.

And that may be part of the lesson.

Financial habits aren't built only through big breakthrough moments.

They're built through the ordinary repetitions too.

Then we added a new question: Was it worth it?

By August 22, we introduced another part of Monty O'Clock.

We reviewed past purchases.

Instead of simply asking:

"What did you buy?"

we asked:

"Was it worth it?"

Simon thought about his gum.

His answer was no.

He wouldn't buy it again.

Mikey reviewed the gum and PEZ dispenser.

His answer was yes to both.

He would buy another PEZ dispenser too, although next time he wanted a Toronto Maple Leafs one.

There was no correct answer.

That was the point.

They were beginning to evaluate spending based on their own experience.

A purchase can keep teaching after the money is gone

Kids often experience a purchase like this:

Want → Get → Move on

But there is a lot of learning available afterward.

• Was it as exciting as expected?
• How long did you care about it?
• Would you spend the money again?
• Would you rather have the cash back?

Reflection turns the purchase cycle into:

Want → Check → Decide → Buy → Experience → Reflect

Over time, that helps a child develop something more valuable than simply "saving more."

It helps them develop their own understanding of value.

Then Simon found $20 inside a book

On August 27, Simon was reading with Mom when he found $20 tucked inside an old book.

We deposited it into Monty.

He chose to put $13 toward the toy he had been saving for.

That was enough.

Goal achieved.

Then he asked:

"Do I need to count the money in my piggy bank and add it into Monty?"

We hadn't done that yet.

So we emptied the piggy bank.

We identified the coins.

We talked about their values.

Then we added everything together.

Simon did most of the addition himself.

A money-management activity had naturally become a math lesson.

Two days later, he bought the goal

On August 29, Simon finally bought the item he had worked toward.

He was thrilled.

But this purchase felt different.

He had experienced the whole cycle:

Choose → Save → Watch → Wait → Reach the goal → Buy

Now "saving works" wasn't something Dad had told him.

He had evidence.

"Is it Monty O'Clock today?"

A few days later, on a Tuesday, Simon asked:

"Is it Monty O'Clock today?"

I told him:

"Not today, buddy. It's only Tuesday. Monty O'Clock is Saturday."

So we decided to add it to his calendar.

He liked that idea.

That may be one of my favourite signals from the entire experiment.

The money conversation wasn't something I was reminding him to do.

He was beginning to anticipate it.

What if you don't want anything?

At the next Monty O'Clock, Simon no longer had a purchase goal.

I asked if there was something new he wanted to save for.

His answer was simple:

Nothing yet.

That was okay.

Kids don't need to invent something to buy simply because money exists.

Sometimes:

"I don't want anything enough right now"

is a very good financial decision.

Giving can wait too

Mikey still had his shark giving goal.

He knew he wanted to donate the money.

He simply hadn't found the cause he wanted to support yet.

So he kept researching.

That created another lesson.

Money in the Give Jar doesn't need to be spent just because it's there.

It can wait until something meaningful comes along.

"But I have money in my Spend Jar!"

On September 8, we were at Booster Juice when Mikey wanted a branded pineapple squishy toy.

We said not today.

He immediately responded:

"I've got money in my Spend Jar!"

And technically, he was right.

He did.

But he also had a drawer at home full of similar little toys.

So we told him:

"Clean out that drawer and make room. If you still want this afterward, we'll come back."

We went home.

He finished his drink.

And forgot about the toy.

That taught me something too.

Giving kids ownership doesn't mean parents stop parenting

A Spend Jar isn't a licence to buy absolutely anything, anytime.

They're still kids.

They don't always remember the drawer full of similar toys.

They don't always understand that something urgently wanted now may be forgotten an hour later.

Monty shouldn't remove the parent from the decision.

It should change the conversation.

Instead of only:

"No."

we can ask:

• "What do you already have?"
• "Will you still want this tomorrow?"
• "What happens to your other goal?"
• "Is this worth your money?"

The child gets ownership.

The parent remains the coach.

Even a little can teach giving

At another Monty O'Clock, Simon and I talked about his Give Jar.

Out of a $7 allowance, a dollar in the Give Jar doesn't look like much.

The amount wasn't the important part.

The preparation was.

One day, something may matter to him.

If he has already been putting money aside, he will have something available to contribute without taking it from another goal.

Giving becomes something you prepare for.

"TWENTY-SIX WEEKS?!"

Meanwhile, Mikey still wanted his Arctic Explorer LEGO set.

During one Monty O'Clock, he decided to put the majority of that week's money into saving while still contributing smaller amounts to his other jars.

Then he reviewed his goal.

At his current saving rate, Monty estimated it would take about:

26 weeks.

His reaction was immediate.

"TWENTY-SIX WEEKS?! OH MY GOSH!"

My wife and I couldn't stop laughing.

So I asked again:

"Are you sure you still want it?"

His answer:

"Oh yeah. It'll be worth it!"

The interesting part wasn't whether his estimate of the eventual date was perfect.

It was the thinking.

He was connecting:

How much I save → How long it takes → How badly I want it

Then his allocations started becoming intentional

By September 19, Monty O'Clock itself felt pretty normal.

But one decision stood out.

Mikey had $10 to allocate.

He put:

• $8 toward his goal
• $1 into Spend
• $1 into Give

I asked him why.

His explanation was basically:

He wanted to reach his LEGO goal faster, and he already had money sitting in his Spend Jar if he needed it.

That was an important evolution.

He wasn't merely dragging numbers between jars.

He was rationalizing his allocation.

He had looked at what he already had, decided what mattered most and adjusted that week's split accordingly.

The next test: spending half the jar

The following day, Mikey bought a Needoh toy using roughly half of the money he had available to spend.

Simon bought a Buzz Lightyear keychain for his backpack.

Both purchases were allowed.

Both boys used their own spending money.

Then the next day became much more interesting.

"I still have money. Why can't I buy more?"

We were heading back to the store when Mikey decided he wanted to use the rest of his Spend Jar to buy more things.

I told him it was his choice.

But I also reminded him of the decision he had made at the previous Monty O'Clock.

He had chosen to put only $1 into Spend because his LEGO goal mattered more.

At that rate, it would take him roughly 45 weeks to replace the money he was considering spending.

Then I asked:

"Do you want to find out what it feels like to have no money in your Spend Jar the next time you really want something?"

I also reminded him that Mom and Dad weren't going to automatically buy those wants for him just because his jar was empty.

He thought about it.

And decided that, for now, keeping the money made more sense.

The lesson wasn't "don't spend"

That distinction matters.

I didn't tell him:

"No. Save your money."

The conversation was:

You chose to prioritise your goal. That means your Spend Jar will refill more slowly. If you spend everything today, what does that mean tomorrow?

He made the final decision.

Hold off.

And Simon was sitting beside him listening to the entire conversation.

Money lessons aren't always one parent teaching one child.

Sometimes a younger sibling learns simply by being in the room.

Then we walked into another toy store

Of course, fifteen minutes later we ended up in another toy store.

Both boys were overstimulated.

They started picking things up and asking:

"Can I buy this from my Spend Jar?"

This was another reminder that knowing the rule and applying it while excited are two different things.

So we introduced another strategy:

"Let's take a picture. If you still want it next month, we can talk about it again. Your Spend Jar needs a break."

They needed a reminder of the conversation we had just had in the car.

Eventually, it clicked.

Again: kids still need coaching.

September 26: would you buy it again?

At the following Monty O'Clock, both boys reviewed their recent purchases.

The Needoh.

The Buzz Lightyear keychain.

Both said their purchases were worth it.

Both said they would buy them again.

That matters too.

The goal isn't for every purchase reflection to end in regret.

A thoughtful:

"Yes. I'm happy I spent my money on that."

is also a successful money decision.

Then the Needoh started leaking

By October 3, the Needoh had started leaking.

We had thrown out the receipt.

Mikey was disappointed.

And suddenly another everyday money lesson appeared:

Keep the receipt.

Especially for purchases that cost enough to matter.

A receipt isn't just something adults stuff in a wallet.

It can give you options if something breaks, fails or needs to be returned.

Again, there was no worksheet.

Real life delivered the lesson.

Monty gave us somewhere to talk about it.

What changed in the first 10 weeks?

This is one family.

Two kids.

Roughly ten weeks.

It is not a controlled study.

But the behavioural signals are becoming increasingly interesting.

The boys have started:

• checking their own money before asking us to buy something
• seeing how one purchase affects another goal
• voluntarily walking away from purchases
• deciding that some purchases genuinely are worth making
• reflecting on purchases afterward
• experiencing delayed gratification
• adjusting their weekly allocation based on priorities
• thinking about how long money will take to replenish
• anticipating future wants before emptying their Spend Jar
• connecting work with earning
• practising arithmetic using real balances
• setting money aside for giving before a cause is chosen
• researching where they want their Give money to go
• understanding the purpose of keeping receipts
• reading and participating in the Monty O'Clock ritual themselves
• explaining why they made a money decision

That last point may be one of the most important.

The goal isn't just better decisions

One of the biggest developments has been hearing the boys explain their reasoning.

Mikey didn't just put $8 toward savings.

He explained why.

He didn't simply walk away from spending the rest of his money.

He understood how long it would take to replace.

Simon didn't simply put back a Hot Wheels car.

He connected buying it with money leaving his own jar.

Good money habits aren't only about getting the decision "right."

They're about being able to answer:

Why did I choose this?

What Simon is learning

At his age, Simon doesn't need complicated financial terminology.

He is learning the foundation underneath it.

Money is limited. Money can have different jobs. Coins have different values. Spending makes balances go down. Saving makes goals move closer. Waiting can lead to something worth having.

He doesn't need to spend simply because money is available.

He can change his mind.

He can prepare to give.

He can reflect on whether a purchase was worth it.

And completing his first goal has shown him that patience can lead to a real reward.

What Mikey is learning

Mikey is beginning to move into deeper reasoning.

He is practising:

• longer-term planning
• opportunity cost
• delayed gratification
• goal forecasting
• prioritising one jar over another
• understanding replenishment
• managing a finite spending balance
• connecting work with earning
• tracking money from different sources
• reviewing receipts
• evaluating past purchases
• researching giving opportunities
• explaining the reasoning behind an allocation
• thinking about whether today's purchase may prevent tomorrow's

His LEGO goal has become an ongoing lesson by itself.

Every week it asks him:

Do you still want this enough to keep going?

So far, the answer remains:

"Oh yeah. It'll be worth it."

The biggest lesson for me as a parent

Monty isn't about giving children complete financial autonomy.

They're not miniature adults.

They're still learning impulse control.

They're still easily overstimulated.

They still need parents to add context.

But there is a big difference between:

Making every money decision for your child

and

Coaching your child through making their own decision.

That's the space I'm increasingly interested in.

The child has money.

The decision has consequences.

The parent helps them see those consequences.

Then, where appropriate, the child gets to choose.

The biggest change still isn't the balance

When this started, I thought Monty might primarily help my kids save.

Ten weeks later, the balances are probably the least interesting part.

What matters are the sentences I'm hearing:

• "How much money is in my Spend Jar?"
• "Do I have to pay for the pineapple?"
• "Is it Monty O'Clock today?"
• "I've got money in my Spend Jar!"
• "Twenty-six weeks?!"
• "I want to put more into Save so I get there faster."
• "It'll be worth it."

They're starting to understand that money isn't simply something adults use to buy them things.

It represents choices.

Small money. Real decisions. Repeated practice.

• A Hot Wheels car.
• A pineapple.
• A pack of gum.
• A PEZ dispenser.
• A Simon toy.
• A Buzz Lightyear keychain.
• A leaking Needoh.
• A $200 LEGO goal.

None of these decisions will determine their financial future.

That's exactly why they're useful.

The consequences are small enough to learn from.

The goal isn't to raise a five-year-old or eight-year-old financial expert.

It's to give them years of practice before the decisions become expensive.

Practise it at Monty O'Clock

You don't need a major financial lesson prepared every week.

Give your child two minutes to:

• See what money came in.
• Decide where it should go.
• Review a goal.
• Talk about something they bought.

Then ask:

"Was it worth it?"

And when they make a decision, try one more question:

"Why?"

You may learn more from their answer than from the balance in any jar.

The short version of this story, with the first five weeks at a glance, is our family case study.