The honest answer is: budgeting does not work the way most guides describe it. Tracking every euro spent on coffee and groceries rarely produces lasting change. What it usually produces is guilt and abandoned spreadsheets by week three.
Where the scepticism is reasonable
If your household income is irregular, a fixed monthly budget is almost structurally impossible to maintain. Freelancers, shift workers, and anyone with variable hours will find that a rigid plan built around a stable salary does not fit their actual life. That frustration is legitimate.
There is also a real problem with complexity. Most budgeting templates are designed for someone with a lot of patience and no children. Families with three kids and two jobs do not have time to categorise 140 transactions a month.
What the research actually shows
Studies on household financial behaviour consistently find that the benefit of budgeting comes not from tracking spending in detail, but from having a rough picture of where money goes. Knowing that roughly 35% of your take-home goes to housing and 18% to food is enough to make decisions. Precision beyond that adds friction without adding clarity.
The families who report that budgeting changed their situation usually describe a simple rule they stuck to, not a complex system they managed. Something like: bills come out first, a fixed amount moves to savings on payday, and the rest is spending money. That is it.
The actual question worth asking
Budgeting does not fix an income problem. If outgoings exceed income by a meaningful margin, no categorisation system closes that gap. But for families where money is tight but not impossible, a light structure tends to reduce financial anxiety more than it restricts spending.