Depends on a case by case basis. There was an article posted recently which said that 1 in 4 people earning >$200k live paycheck to paycheck. It's very easy to succumb to lifestyle inflation and not improve financial security despite higher pay.

When you have zero income the aim is to spent as little a possible.

How many celebrities, pop stars and lottery winners ended up bankrupt after earning/winning millions?

For most people making high wages in tech, I would guess that it's much easier to spend less than it is to make more. Not spending 100$ has the benefit that you'll have an "extra" 100$. When you make 100$ you have to split it with the tax man :)

"Healthier"?

Depends. If you can stop spending on some irrelevant shit, then I don't see it being more healthier.

If you have to stop spending on better quality food, then yes.

Either way: why not both? earn more and spend less :)

I review my transactions on regular basis (once a month), using apps like mint or similar to see trends in each category, it takes 5mins. But I catch a lot of delayed payments, insurance companies increase payment, recurring payments that you wanted to cancel but did not, extra charges that you didn not recognize and so on..

These number catch up, simple review transaction is saves a ton of money.

The risk with this is everytime your earnings go up, your expenditure follows suit. If your motivation to earn more is because you spend too much - that underlying reason isn't going away once you get that big pay rise unless you really look at how and what on you are spending your income on.

One of the most relavatory phrases that really got me thinking (and changing) is "live under your means".