The Language Nobody Taught Us: Why Financial Literacy Is the Most Important Subject You Never Studied

There is one subject that will affect every decision you make for the rest of your life: what you eat, where you live, whether you can afford to leave a job that makes you miserable, and even whether you can help your family in an emergency.

Interestingly enough, as crucial as it is, the matter is not taught in schools. Locally, in Lithuania, as in the vast majority of European countries, it is not even a part of the standard curriculum. Most young people reach adulthood having studied the causes of World War I, the Pythagorean theorem, and the conjugation of verbs in at least two foreign languages but having never once been shown how a bank account actually works, what happens to money over time, or why the difference between spending and investing can determine the entire trajectory of a life. Quite ironic, isn't it?

This is not an accident, and it is definitely not a minor problem.

​

What Does Financial Literacy Actually Mean?

Financial literacy at its core is the ability to understand and utilize financial information. It is the capacity to read the language that the economic world speaks - the language of interest rates, inflation, assets, volatilities, risk, and return.

But defining it so clinically misses something important. Financial literacy is not merely a technical skill, like knowing how to operate a piece of software. It is the difference between being acted upon by economic forces and being able to act within them.

Here’s an example - let us take two people, both 22 years old, both earning the same entry-level salary in Vilnius. The first has no financial education. He treats his salary as a number that arrives and disappears once a month. Savings are kept in a standard current account, where they earn close to nothing. Unaware of what inflation is doing to that money, that at even a modest-sounding 3% annual inflation rate, a 1000€ check sitting untouched loses roughly a quarter of its purchasing power over a decade. Investing, you ask? It is for wealthy people, for professionals, for people who understand things he does not.

The second adult, armed with only the tip of financial literacy, understands a few fundamental things. He knows that money sitting idle is not neutral - it is quietly losing value. He knows that time is the most powerful variable in building wealth, and that starting at 22 rather than 32 is not just a 10-year head start but potentially a compound interest bomb. Contributing small, regular amounts to a low-cost index fund. Even though he does not become rich overnight, he will become so.

By the time both are 45, the gap between them - created not by intelligence, not by opportunity, not by luck, but purely by knowledge - will likely run into the tens of thousands of euros (if not hundreds!).

This is what financial illiteracy costs. And it costs it quietly, even subtly.

​

The European Context: A Problem From The Roots

Financial literacy rates across Europe are, by almost every measure, inadequate. A 2022 report by the OECD found that less than half of adults in most European countries could correctly answer basic questions about compound interest, inflation, and diversification, among young people, the figures are even worse.

Lithuania presents a live case. The country has undergone a remarkable economic transformation since independence - from a Soviet-era sovereignty economy to one of the fastest-growing economies in the EU, yet this economic dynamism has not been accompanied by widespread financial education. A generation of Lithuanians still continue growing up in households where money is discussed in terms of survival, never strategy. The concept of investing is considered either foreign or associated with the corruption of the post-Soviet transition period. This way, the default relationship with money is associated with anxiety, not freedom. Even as a Generation Z individual, one who can see the most modern version of Lithuania yet, I often notice the circumventing or making way around these topics.

This legacy matters. Attitudes toward money are not formed in adulthood, they are formed in childhood kitchens, in overheard conversations, in the models provided - or not provided - by the adults around us. For many young Lithuanians, and young Europeans more broadly, those models were shaped by scarcity, by distrust of financial institutions, or simply by the absence of any financial discourse at all.

The result is a generation that is economically active but financially passive - earning and spending, perhaps saving a little if lucky, but largely unequipped to make the financial system work for them unlike now.

Why School Didn't Fix This?

It is only understandable to inquire why schools have not addressed this gap. The answer is a mix of history, politics, and structure.

Historically, personal finance was considered a private matter - something families handled, or didn't, outside the domain of formal education. The curriculum was built around the transmission of established knowledge: literature, mathematics, history, and science. Money, with its associations with commerce and class, sat awkwardly alongside these traditions.

Politically, financial education is contested territory. Teaching young people how financial systems work - how wealth accumulates, how debt functions, how markets are structured inevitably raises questions about those systems. There is no politically neutral way to teach capitalism to a teenager (as if capitalism is neutral itself!).

Structurally, teachers are not trained in personal finance, and the subject does not fit neatly into existing disciplinary categories. Is it mathematics? Economics? Life skills? All of them at the same time? The ambiguity has allowed it to fall through the cracks of curricula designed for a different world.

The consequence is that financial education, when it happens at all, is left in the open: to a parent who happens to know, a book stumbled upon, a YouTube channel found at the right moment. This is not a system, but rather a lottery. And like all lotteries, it is regressive: those who already have financial knowledge in their families pass it on; those who do not, do not.

What Changes When You Know

Do not understand it wrongly - financial literacy does not solve poverty, does not equalise opportunity. It does not address the structural conditions that make wealth accumulation genuinely inaccessible for many people. These are important qualifications, and they matter.

However, in the real options actually available to a young person in contemporary Europe, financial knowledge greatly expands the set of options. The organization turns passive money relationships into active ones. It takes away anxiety. Anxiety is what a person feels when they are lost in a complex process they don’t comprehend. Replaced with clarity and clarity with agency. 

It changes the questions you ask. Instead of "can I afford this?" the question becomes "what is this costing me in terms of future value?" Instead of "I should save more money," the question becomes "what is the most effective structure for saving given my timeline and goals?" These are not mere mindset shifts, they represent a fundamentally different orientation toward one's own economic life.

Moreover, incidentally, make individuals more difficult to exploit. Predatory financial products – high-fee investment schemes, misleading savings accounts, debt products with obscured compounding structures – rely on financial ignorance.  A population that knows a lot is stronger.

Why This Generation, Why Now?

There is a particular urgency to financial education for young Europeans today that did not exist for previous generations.

Across the continent, the pension systems providing relative security for older cohorts are coming under pressure. The pay-as-you-go systems that support state pensions in Lithuania and other EU states are being put under pressure by the changing demographic and aging populations. Society's implicit social contract of past generations, to work and contribute, and eventually retire with institutional support, is currently undergoing a renegotiation that shifts more of the responsibility onto people to fund their own future.

At the same time, the mechanisms for doing so have become more accessible than at any previous point in history, for example mobile investment platforms, low-cost index funds, and freely available financial education online: the fences to building financial knowledge have never been lower.

The combination of greater individual responsibility and accessibility creates a situation in which financial literacy is not a luxury or an advantage but a near-necessity. The young people who understand this and act on it early will be materially better positioned in their forties and fifties than those who do not. The gap will not be explained by talent or effort or luck. It will be explained by knowledge.

What's next?

The goal is not to make everyone an investor, or to sell any particular financial product, or to offer advice differenciated to individual circumstances. The goal is simpler (and in some ways more radical), to make the language of money accessible to young people who have been systematically excluded from it, and to demonstrate that understanding your financial life is not a specialist skill but a basic dimension of modern literacy.

Just because a person who doesn't know what inflation is doing to his savings is not less intelligent than the onr who does. They are less informed. And that is a problem with a solution.

The first step is to start speaking the language. That is what this is.