Wealth, Relationships, and Finding Contentment
Episode 17 with Dr. Sonya Lutter and Wes Brown
Wealth isn't just about the money—it's about the richness of our relationships, the quality of our time, and the sense of contentment in our lives. In this episode, hosts Wes Brown and Sonya Lutter reflect on the first quarter of conversations on Analog Advisor. From exploring different "lands of wealth" to the impact of financial transparency on relationship satisfaction, they unpack how money changes the fabric of human connection.
From dialogues with Dr. Jim Grubman and Scott Rick, Sonya and Wes have some serious insight to unpack. Learn how joint vs separate bank accounts impact relationship satisfaction and why financial transparency might be the secret ingredient to lasting happiness.
Tune in to challenge conventional notions of wealth and well-being and consider the role money plays in our relationships.
-
Wes Brown 0:00
Well, I'm excited to do this first episode and just kind of recap some of the things we've done so far this quarter and, you know, sort of dive deeper on questions that maybe came up during past interviews, but that we didn't have time, or really even know that we wanted to dive into deeper. So, thanks for taking a few minutes. So here we go. Yeah. So tell me on your what's on your mind. What are the, you know, I think we've done we've done which, which episodes do we do this quarter we had
Sonya Lutter 0:41
Jim Grubman Okay, that's right. Then we talked with Scott,
Wes Brown 0:45
spin spendthrifts and tightwads or vice versa, like that tightwads?
Sonya Lutter 0:53
Yeah, it depends, which, I suppose is what you say first? Yeah, you know, I've really been thinking about Jim's interview a lot. And he talked about the land, lands of wealth. I think that's an important clarification right there. And what does that mean to be living in these different lands, and Jim certainly lives in a different land, or Island than I live on. But a lot of the things that he said were really relevant, and they've been resonating with me of I live on a differently into than I grew up with. And still, that's difficult to navigate. So I'm also curious for you, if that resonated for you of how you grew up, and how that's maybe the same or different now? And does that translate across? All levels of wealth? Changes?
Wes Brown 1:52
Does that make sense? So?
Sonya Lutter 1:59
I do not live in the same land of wealth as Jim. That is 100% Sure. Probably not even like, same area code. But unrolled is a land of wealth for me. Yeah. On relative terms, yes.
Wes Brown 2:15
And I can, I can relate to that. Like conceptually. There's a, there's a migration that's taking place in our world, in mind, for sure, from where we started to where we are today. For, you know, sometimes I try to figure out if that's of my own doing, if that's circumstances, opportunities, you know, things that were just different for me than they were for my parents. I also wonder to sort of have macro level, you know, wealth, generally, our general level of prosperity in 2024, versus 1984. You know, we've all been lifted to some degree. So I have a hard time figuring out like, what's, what's a byproduct of stuff I've done or opportunities I've had and what is like, man, we drive way nicer cars today than we did when I was a kid. But everybody drives an extra cars. Most for the most part, maybe?
Sonya Lutter 3:22
That's right. I think it might be legal to drive this car.
Wes Brown 3:25
I think so. I'm not totally sure. Seatbelts optional. Yeah, yeah. All that. Yeah.
Sonya Lutter 3:35
Yeah. So then I wonder, this, this new land of wealth that I live in, is that going to be good enough? Or is there always this inclination to try to get to the next land of wealth? Is not picked peculiar, and how do you be happy with where you are? Which does somewhat relate into our more recent interviews that are not yet in this first quarter? We're going to make started to dig into those of what does it mean to be happy and, and content with where you are financially? And looking at those different perspectives from? Yeah, living in different lands of wealth? I think that's really it. Right?
Wes Brown 4:22
Do you feel like we're all climbing? We're all trying to get to the next level.
Sonya Lutter 4:35
Think we're all trying to get to a better place? And does that mean a different land of wealth, perhaps, or does it mean greener grass and that land of wealth? Perhaps, but I don't know that it's necessarily tied to wealth per se, but just having been better off than like you were before. So let's say, maybe you want to go to a different land of wealth. That's not so focused on the dollars. But that's more balanced. Maybe that's okay, too, because the grass is greener over there.
Wes Brown 5:16
Yes. I'm not sure it's responsive. Yes, yes. Yes.
Sonya Lutter 5:27
Yeah. So I think it goes to some of the conversations of what do you want to convey to that next generation of, of contentment with where you are? And in that land? And how do you be comfortable in that land? And what does that mean for if I live in this particular land of wealth, but like, I'm in this tiny little island, and amongst a group, my community lives in a different land of wealth, I think that becomes that
Wes Brown 5:54
something good to you can relate to personally?
Sonya Lutter 6:01
Oh, for sure, yep. We live in a small town. And it's your typical American small town, and everyone is approximately the same income level, I presume, unless you have a job that's outside of that community, which I do. And I think that is difficult to navigate in a lot of levels. Because I'm not a school teacher. I'm not a police officer. I don't work at the bank. I don't work at the grocery store. That's not what I do. And I think that is difficult to communicate to, to myself internally, how do I internalize that, but it's also makes for difficult conversations with children, with my children, and why do we do things differently? And we don't need to dig into social media a lot, always there. But it is there, right? I mean, there's that constant comparison of who I hang around with, and those perceptions of wealth and, and we don't spend money on, on some things that other people spend money on, even though I have a pretty good idea that we don't live on the same land of wealth, and perhaps I could buy those things. But I don't buy those things. And then when you communicate to the next generation that becomes complicating to have those conversations, which leads very well into some of the stuff that Scott was talking about. spending and saving. And what it what sort of conversations do you want to have with children of using resources in a way that aligns with your values, that is not mimicking what's happening around you in social media, or in your community or your friends. But that matches your values and your land of wealth and the land that you want to stay on? Or maybe so
Wes Brown 8:09
let me back up a second. Do you? Do you feel like, again, I love air quotes. So I'm holding up air quotes. Do you? Do you think that everybody's land of wealth? Meaning the one that they find themselves in that's distinct from the one they grew up in, find themselves in at some point that may be distinct from the one they grew up in? Is, is defined differently? Or do you feel like there's a you know, it's more like moving from Europe, to the US, you know, one land to a very distinct other land. But then, you know, the specifics for each one of us are, you know, the specific cities we might be in, right? So how do you feel like, do you feel like there are levels of definition and there's an absolute sense of, you're on this side, you're on this continent or this continent? And then you know, it goes down further and becomes more subjective or relative to our specific communities?
Sonya Lutter 9:31
Yeah, that's an interesting analogy. And I probably would agree with that, that there are countries of wealth literally and figuratively. And I do live similarly to other people of my land of wealth, but how I interpret that as much different because Have, right my immediate surroundings?
Wes Brown 10:02
Yeah, I mean, you could use? I think Jim does or I don't know if he referenced it when we talked to them, but I think he does in his book, you know, it's like languages, there's, you're speaking distinct languages in one land versus another. And then there are dialects within those languages, you know, that are more like how you might interact with your more immediate community. You're still on one island on one piece of land or the other, right?
Sonya Lutter 10:32
Me? Yeah, that's a good one, I actually forgot how Jim talked about that with the different languages and, and you see that show up in a lot of different ways with wealth because of, I get to travel a lot. And so I have exposure to different cultures and different food and, and different ways of dining and living, that do not translate well, to the community in which I live. So yeah,
Wes Brown 11:02
I think it's interesting, because, you know, I have no idea about the land that Jim lives in, at all. And, like, Yeah, but I have, but I don't even like I don't, I wouldn't know what his is, right? I don't know any specifics about his circumstances. What I did pick up on this conversation was how comfortable he was where he was, right? He, I didn't get a sense from him. And he's been in this space for a long time, both professionally and personally. But I didn't get a sense from him that he was. He doesn't strike me as being showy, or anything like that.
Sonya Lutter 11:51
Right. Sorry. Yeah, I agree with that. And the other thing I really appreciated about Jim's conversation was that the bulk of this money came upon after he was married. And so that was a whole nother negotiation he had to have with his wife, who was the same wife that he had before the wealth. And I think that's a pretty major thing to be able to navigate that shift in wealth in a relationship, and also their child, and having those conversations with the next generation of wealth. And he seems to be navigating that wasn't, it is
Wes Brown 12:36
just seemed to, he seemed to really hold it loosely. It wasn't, you know, I mean, even to write it is what it is. And even in the way that he will, how he talked with his kids. I went home and talked with my family about this. This language, but of you know, not enough enough and more than enough, as opposed to, you know, when you're I liked that, because it it gets away from it feels like it gets away from it being a status. Issue, Rich versus poor, or middle class. I mean, like, those, those labels carry with them implications that are positive or negative, but they're just there. And enough, not enough. And more than enough, didn't. I don't know, it didn't strike me in the same way.
Sonya Lutter 13:42
Yeah, that's interesting. So the thing that I've been ruminating on is maybe really tied up into that, and knowing that these different lands of wealth, you just have to find the one well enough. Yeah, actually,
Wes Brown 13:58
that's a great point. Right? So where you fall in that those three tiers of not enough enough, and more than enough could depend on the land you live in? To some degree. Yeah, I
Sonya Lutter 14:17
that's a good takeaway. I forgot that about him. And that was so powerful and so
Wes Brown 14:23
well, okay, so hear me out here. And, um, I haven't thought about this really before, but it seems to me that it requires you to think of the amount of wealth that you have, or your I don't want to use the word status. So to think of the level of wealth that you have in those terms, would require a good deal of self awareness. Right. And, and also a sense of, you know, what is enough? Because there has to be there's some benchmark that that's tied to, and it could be subjective, you know? But you also get to decide, for me, this is enough. Are you following me here? Like in the sense that it requires you to have to, like reconcile with what you need, in order for it to be enough? Does that make sense?
Sonya Lutter 15:31
Yeah, I think so, kind of where my mind started wandering was you can't move to a different land of wealth. Without I don't know if it's been invited or earning it. So that's also another element of, of this subjective element. Like, there are some objective features of these different lands of wealth, and you can't just put yourself in a different land and expect to fit in. It's not, it doesn't work that way, either. Which goes back to having enough for the place that you are, and being happy with where you are? If you're not happy with it, then
Wes Brown 16:15
well, and if you're not happy with it? Well, if you're not happy with it, where you are in the place, if you don't have enough, where you are, if you acclimate to a new culture, do you think you're gonna have enough there? I guess that's what I'm getting at. Like the determining factor, and whether it's not enough enough or more than enough, has very little probably to do with what land you're in. It has more to do with your own your yourself, right, where you get where you get to decide that is that false? Right? I know, we're meandering a bit here. But that's interesting. Yeah.
Sonya Lutter 16:57
No, yeah, that is interesting.
Wes Brown 17:01
I still think you know, what, the other thing I've been thinking about, though, too, and this, this applies to my own migration, if you will, is, you know, what are the things that I've been thinking about the interview? And I've been kind of centered on what are the things that people in the land of wealth? Again, we're sort of assuming there's an absolute, there, but in we just were saying it's somewhat subjective, but people who have money who have more than enough, what are the things that they do that? That get them there? So again, you know, a lot of people receive the money or they build a business or whatever, but like, what are the characteristics of their behavior? Like there must be specific behaviors that they all have?
Yeah, yeah, go for it. I'm
Sonya Lutter 17:59
getting lost. This might be a tiny bit of a tangent, but it is. Well, this is something I wanted to bring up. Because when we are talking about Scott's conversation and joint accounts, makes couples happier. And there's evidence that it goes in that order for early couples, and then we had the conversation about not on recording, but off screen, if you will, on do joint accounts, also make people wealthier. And I think that's a really fascinating thing. So could it be that I am more content or satisfied in my relationship, and I'm investing in that relationship would also invest in my wealth, or grows my wealth in a way? And so naturally, I went down the rabbit hole of the date the data? And maybe it does. So I don't want to say definitively yet. Because it's been it's very preliminary at this point. But there does seem to be a tiny bit of evidence to suggest that couples who co mingle their assets do have higher levels of wealth. And there's a lot to dig into there of when that commingling happened, and what does that relationship look like? But I really find that work that Scott's done, super fascinating that regardless of what it does to your wealth, so more to come on that. But what we do know from Scotts research very clearly, is that couples are happier, more content more satisfied when they have more joint accounts. And that's something pretty easy you can do and I think that's what's the reasoning
Wes Brown 19:45
that Scott's gave Do you remember for why that why that's the case?
Sonya Lutter 19:52
I Yeah. Yeah, we shouldn't go back and listen to that, right. It was in my mind that rationale that the rationale that I always have for it is when you have joint accounts, you're forced to have more money conversations with your partner, because you have to be on the same page of where the money is going, you have to know how much is in there. Presumably you're also filing taxes jointly if you're having these joint accounts. So there's just a lot more conversations that go into and a lot more transparency of this is where we are. And perhaps where do we want to go with that. So it doesn't require that you have those future conversations. But I think it definitely set yourself up in a better position to have future conversations, because it's all right there in front of you for both of you to see all of the time. And so greater transparency, you need to be on the same page of values. A lot of what Scott also talked about was the spender saver. element. And if you do have partners have different spending and personality types, that makes those conversations even more effective. And when you have those join accountants. You have to have one. So maybe that's the
Wes Brown 21:17
it all makes sense to me. I mean, I think it's like, yeah, yeah. I mean, it gets to other things too. Related to accountability. Excuse me. It and appreciation for the others contributions?
Sonya Lutter 21:38
Yeah. Financial and non Yeah. But
Wes Brown 21:41
because, in many circumstances, you know, each spouse doesn't, or each partner doesn't necessarily contribute equally to that bank account. But you know, collectively.
Sonya Lutter 21:56
A huge Yeah, the non paid Labor's huge. Yeah. The only thing that I'm still questioning about Scott stuff, and this isn't about Scott, per se, but just, I don't know that we have a great understanding of what happens for couples who remarried, or couples later in life, or maybe they have been married a long time, but they've always had joint accounts, or separate accounts, what happens if then later in life, they start the joint accounts. Because that's a whole nother dynamic to navigate, particularly if one of the people have children from a prior relationship, or maybe have other sorts of obligations that the other person doesn't necessarily feel are their obligations? So debt, perhaps, and what does that look like for couples? And I don't know that we know for sure, but maybe you have perspective, my experience.
Wes Brown 23:01
It's, there's kind of a it's kind of a both end scenario, right. So they have joint and separate and they're very specific about for, for, in fact, in one client situation. Both had from what I understand contentious divorces long, long time ago, but early, you know, early on, had contentious divorces, and each had their own kids, excuse me. And so they had in so she was very protective, and fearful of, she's protective, what she had and fearful that she wouldn't have enough always, even though they had way more than enough. And he was always sort of have the mindset of, you know, I have plenty, we can just share everything. So that was interesting. She she really wanted to keep her separate, we manage their portfolios separately. And but we did their planning together. So they were they were like, both bought into like, this is our plan together. She really was very insistent that her money be managed distinctly from his and there and there's a lot of reasons and I understand this too. There's a variety of reasons why this would be the case but their estate planning was different to his all went to her hers went to her kids and that's just where they got they just had to get comfortable with that. Now in other scenarios I've seen just particularly say from a cash flow standpoint, like a household finances standpoint, you know, they have joint and separate so, each one has some some combination of either all the money comes into the joint account, and then they So irrespective of their level of earnings relative to each other, all you know, all paychecks come into the joint account and then they each get a set dollar amount as like personal spending just You know, you know, no oversight, nobody else gets to see what they spend that money on if they save it great if they spend it great. And I've seen the opposite, where each has their own individual account. And their paychecks come into their own individual account. And then they contribute a set amount 50% of the household expenses, to a joint household account that pays all the expenses, everything leftover, even if there's a big disparity, which is interesting to think about. And I'd be curious to know your thoughts on the flow of funds in either one of those areas. Even if there's a big disparity, so let's just, let's say, you know, one made double what the other one made, they're each putting $1,000 a month into the household account, one may have $10,000 A month leftover to spend on whatever they want. And the other might have, you know, $5,000, leftover. So curious, I'd be curious to know what your thoughts are there, but I've seen it done both ways.
Sonya Lutter 26:04
Yeah, I don't love the latter way, because it sets up the power dynamics. And I also. Okay, so I'm thinking of a couple I know. And she makes probably a quarter of what he makes. And the way that they do their accounts is she's responsible for a quarter of the household expenditures, and he's responsible for the rest, because that's how their income is split up, but they don't have joint accounts. And I don't love that either. Because it puts you in a weird position, because if I'm making 25% of my partner, I feel like I'm worth 25% of the relationship, and it just doesn't feel good. So I really do think that the literature, the research holds that the more joint accounts, the happier the relationship. So I, I liked that first scenario, you said to where all of the money goes into the joint account. And then we can each have whatever that dollar amount is. And if that dollar amount was the same, I feel even better about that. Because that is that puts everybody on an equal playing field. And it acknowledges some of those non financial contributions that are hard to quantify, like people have tried to do it in terms of, maybe I make less, and I also have a more flexible job. So therefore, I am more available for emergency situations, or to get the groceries or to keep the house picked up, or, or maybe I don't work at all. And when it all goes into a joint account, and everybody gets the same dollar amount. And that's what creates the satisfaction that we see in the data that's associated with the joint accounts and relationship satisfaction, which really cannot be argued with like that's now very clearly established. So I think when you start deviating from that element of complete sheerness,
Wes Brown 28:14
okay, so I haven't looked at the data like you have. So this might be something that was sussed out a long time ago. But I'm wondering about, it feels like there's somewhat of a chicken in the egg scenario there. Which is to join accounts lead to greater relationship satisfaction, or is it that if you're more satisfied in your relationships, then you're more likely to you know, put your ass you know, merge your assets together?
Sonya Lutter 28:51
Yeah, so let me remind you of a major mistake I made and Scott's interview. I went trail of telling him about this really fascinating research about it. That's research. Yeah. Yeah, so he answered that question and that research, and but it was among couples who are just getting married. So he had this nice sample of couples who are getting married within the next year, I think. And then he split them into three separate groups of, we're going to ask you guys to join all of your money when you get married within the next six months, a year, whatever it was. And then this third of the group, I want you to keep all of your money separate. And this third of the group, you can do whatever you want, like we're not, we're just following them. We're not doing anything in particular, and they followed them over two years. And it was very measurable of the increase in relationship satisfaction amongst that group who had the joint accounts. And that's a pretty significant time for are couples and not first couple of years as they're navigating a whole lot of newness. And so it's almost as if the data looks as if that joint accounts, or accounts provided some sort of a buffer against that natural decline in relationship satisfaction that you see in those first few years of marriage. But the question remains, what about later in life? So I don't know, in the chicken and egg situation, then like if, if you're 40 years old, and now you're getting married or remarried? What does that relationship look
Wes Brown 30:36
like? Well, is it as action, causal of a relationship? If let's say you don't do this at the outset, but 10 years in? And, you know, again, you likely have first hand experience here, I would imagine at least that knowledge of the data but and, you know, folks are struggling? If you were to say, go ahead and just make everything joint, that'll make it better. Like it seems a little dangerous, and it feels like everybody will dangerous. If you're not already there, and things are rough, like you're not going to be inclined to do that. But I guess I wonder like, is that really the basis for satisfaction? And would that have a corrective impact on the dynamic, I guess?
Sonya Lutter 31:32
Right. I mean, you could think of a lot of negative scenarios there. But I think if you were in a, in a fine spot, maybe not great, but also not conflictual. Taking the step back and what that relationship means for early couples, I think we would see the same for a couple who's been married for five or 10 years. And then they decide to join the accounts, because it's a sign of commitment. And it's a sign of increased transparency, which leads to trust, which leads to satisfaction. So I do think that you would still see a bit of a causal relationship, but probably not for the couples who have already entered a conflictual state, because then there's just going to be more conflict of yeah, that necessity for transparency. So
Wes Brown 32:24
bringing this full circle back to the land of the lands, lands, whatever we decided, I guess we decided there's multiple lands. lands. Yeah. Yeah, are we are we saying that? Well, where's the overlap? I guess? Yeah, I
Sonya Lutter 32:51
think the overlap is the greater transparency, the better. That's obvious, right? But to get to the land of wealth, perhaps there needs to be this level of being on the same page financially. And what does that mean? Being on the same page, maybe it means having those joint accounts, but maybe it also just means having those conversations and knowing what is enough? And feeling like you are at that point of having enough, otherwise, you'll never reach the land of wealth that you desire. Interesting.
Wes Brown 33:35
I bring him in it all together? I mean, I think I think both require will case. So there's so many factors, right? I think. So we're isolating one, which is, or trying to anyways, just to see if there's overlap. So I think like, that's hard for me to isolate a little bit. Because, again, there's like so many scenarios where you can be like, Well, what about this? And what about this? And where, what about the, you know, confluence of these other things? I think that if I were just to back up and say, for the people I know that have a high level of wealth, more than enough. They have done some amount of work on themselves and in their relationships in order to be able to behave in a way that grows and sustains the wealth that they have. And so and then in that would seem like it there's something there's a parallel there in the sense that like, maybe one of the acts they do and I don't know I'd have to go and ask some clients hate you guys have joined like how many? But you know, maybe one of the things they do that also requires some, some work on relationships and whatnot and on yourselves is you want is to have joint accounts. So
Sonya Lutter 35:07
I think that's a great and you know, it reminds me a lot of holistic wellbeing, and how some people think that financial wellbeing is the pinnacle of life. But the reality is you cannot reach financial wellbeing if you're suffering in these other areas of well being. So can you be in the desired land of wealth? If you're suffering? relationally? I probably don't think so. And, and vice versa? And what does that mean for your career? well being and community wellbeing and feeling good with where you are, it's all tied together. So I think you're absolutely right, that you kind of do need both the relationship and that doesn't necessarily be mean being married, or in a couple ship, but just the people that that you're around and feeling comfortable, and having those conversations with them. And, and being happy with those relationships, I think is goes right alongside
Wes Brown 36:12
that financial aid. And I think we would agree in the fact that like, and I, you know, I actually had a conversation with clients recently who, you know, have a good amount of money received, you know, a good amount of money. And, you know, I think it goes back to, I'll share the story here in a second, it goes back to how you measure wealth. So this is maybe a conversation for like, a future episode. But that overall, well being, you know, it's interesting. So these, these clients would be in the more than enough category. And one of the things that I heard them say recently was that the best part of having money, or the best thing that, you know, having money has done for them is to give them time. So they're measuring their wealth in terms of not the numbers on the page, but in terms of the time and capacity it's given them to invest in and spend time with those that they you know, those that they love their relationships. Yeah, that was really neat. That's interesting. Maybe, did he?
Sonya Lutter 37:21
I think, Jim. I think so. I was, I know, yeah. This is why we're doing these recaps.
Wes Brown 37:31
I think I was, I was writing down and crossing out questions. We weren't gonna get to I was I was getting distracted. So okay, well, this is good. Yeah.
Sonya Lutter 37:43
This has been fun for me to reflect upon these two episodes, and we have some more really exciting ones coming up them and yeah,
Wes Brown 37:51
I agree. It will be alright too. as well. Yep.