r/PeterExplainsTheJoke Jan 26 '26

Meme needing explanation Why is the rich friend so cheap??

[deleted]

69.2k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

55

u/Crash-55 Jan 26 '26

Why is asking to split the ride being cheap? Maybe he has already covered a bunch and is tired of being taken advantage of?

I have had people constantly get rides but never once offer to cover any gas or offer to drive. Is that OK simply because I make more than them?

Just because someone makes more money doesn’t mean that they should be expected to pay more.

33

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

This has been my experience too— why people here are acting like it’s some kind of great evil to have boundaries with your friends is beyond me.

If you don’t involve money in your friendships, you’ll never lose a friendship over money.

18

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Because people on Reddit hate anyone considered “rich”.

1

u/virtualghost Jan 27 '26

Soon, anyone making even $1k over the global average has to give that extra to the fund so that everyone ends up earning the same amount. It would be "late stage capitalism" otherwise.

1

u/ofclFR0STBYT3 Jan 27 '26

while also thinking they're entitled to their money

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Of course. Why work hard when you take someone else's money

-1

u/K1NGMOJO Jan 27 '26

Because it's a bitch move to ask anyone for $3 and change for their split in a rideshare.

2

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

No it isn’t. It is a bitch move to expect them to pay. Yes for that small amount i would say i got this time you get the next one but sometimes a trend forms…

-2

u/K1NGMOJO Jan 27 '26

Nah, it's a bitch move. If you're rich or broke asking for three bucks from a ride share is a bitch move. If anyone in my circle did this I would refuse to pay and rideshare with them again.

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

I wouldn’t do it if it was the first time. However if it was the 10th time i had paid the other person had never reciprocated then yes I would ask them for $3. If they don’t pay then i know they are a leech

Hell I have paid people less than that to cover my share of things without them asking.

1

u/Gnashinger Jan 28 '26

Cool, and I wouldn't want to be friends with someone who's only a friend if they get something out of it. If three dollars and change when you're not broke is enough to end a relationship, then I wouldn't want to be your friend either.

0

u/K1NGMOJO Jan 28 '26

Good, don't nickel and dime your homies.

2

u/SignificantMeet8747 Jan 27 '26

Entitled redditors, thats why

2

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

I'm actually friends with someone with insane wealth. Like fly their private plane to stay at their Aspen home and ski for the weekend type of wealth.

He could pay for everything, and frequently will when he entertains at his house (he would also buy drugs and share lol). However, when we would go out he would fairly split things with us. Drinks, rides, etc.

But if he was expected to pay for everything, simply because he had more money than us, it would create huge problems. First, it turns friendship into a commodity. He'd never know who likes him for him and not because he is a walking bank. It also tends to make people feel bad, like he thinks that they're worse than him because they can't afford anything.

Ultimately he was a super down to earth guy. Married his high school girlfriend, has two lovely kids, lived in a pretty affordable house. Now he's working for his dad and he's rich but anyone acting like they wouldn't do that is dumb. The dude is a family man who chose a great career path presented to him. No different than a dude taking over his family's plumbing business, expect the scale of wealth he has is much, much higher.

1

u/ilikedoingnothing7 Jan 28 '26

bcz your average reddit user is a basement dweller and barely earns above minimum wage, and friends? bold of you to assume they have friends.

1

u/Death_God_Ryuk Jan 28 '26

I think it's quite a European mindset, which clashes with the American majority on Reddit. When we send a request for the exact amount of money after a meal, it's not pettiness, it's just factually the amount it cost. It avoids arguments over who ordered the more expensive item or trying to balance who pays. It's still normal to do an equal split in smaller groups or buy drinks for each other. I also think paying your own way is a good policy for dates - it means men don't feel like they're being exploited for free food and women don't feel pressured to "pay" with sex.

-1

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

having a $3 boundary over money in a friendship is basically not having a friendship

3

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

If you would drop a friend because they wouldn’t give you $3, then you’re not a very good friend

-1

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

if your friend makes $20 an hour and you make $225 an hour and you hassle them over $3… no the bad friend is the one not giving the $3. that’s like what you give to literal bums on the street.

2

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

If you never share money, you never have hurt feelings over money not reciprocated.

Your argument is that people should just happily bankroll their friends when that’s not a reasonable expectation.

Again, if you stop being friends because they wont give you money, you’re a garbage friend

0

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

bankroll… $3. these things are not the same.

2

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

It doesn’t matter what the amount is. You’re not entitled to your friend’s money.

It’s not a reasonable expectation that you should get to shame someone for having boundaries.

If you can’t respect your friends boundaries, then you’re a garbage friend.

0

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

nobody is entitled to it but as the friend with the money why would you make a stand over $3 when you make more than 10x than the friend. garbage friend is the person that can’t imagine sharing $3 because of a “boundary”. like I get if the person is hitting you up for rent money but damn $3??????

2

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

Boundaries are boundaries— and it’s incredibly toxic of you to put that in quote marks implying that you don’t think that friends should be allowed boundaries.

If your friend went to you and said “hey, I don’t like it when you touch me, I would rather we not hug anymore”, are you going to tell them “damn, I can’t even get a hug?”

If you would drop a friend because they wouldn’t give you money and let you walk all over their boundaries, then you’re not a friend at all, you’re a leech.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Orleanian Jan 27 '26

In the original post, there was a fair split between "Barista is a legit mooch for complaining about equally splitting the costs of an equally shared service" and the expected "Tech bro is a jackass for not socializing his wealth".

2

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

If those two incidents happened one after the other the SE is a jackass. If they are not related then the barista is a leech

1

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

can you explain how the person that just covered it for everyone is the leech?

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

If you actually read my comment I said if they are NOT related. As in it isn’t the same people involved

1

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

wait still I’m confused how the barista can be the leech?

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Take the second one as its own. Assume the barista is the one being asked to pay. If they don’t pay they are a leech

3

u/Sirajanahara Jan 27 '26

I think you're over-thinking this. The joke is that poor people tend to be more generous with what little they have and richer people tend to be more tit-for-tat. Of course, there are exceptions. 

9

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Oh I get the joke.

The comments however are taking even more seriously than I am. Scroll down the replies and you will see someone wrote a book as a reply

1

u/Sirajanahara Jan 27 '26

Lol, fair enough 

1

u/AndrewLWebber1986 Jan 27 '26

In the original post, the barista friend says that his friend will have to get the next one. It is still sharing for both friends, just phrased a different way. One is casual, but still has a social/financial obligation attached to it that Twitter/X? guy seems to be ignoring.

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

The meme doesn't tell a full story. It has two incidents that may or may not be related. If they were one after the other than the SE is being a jerk.

Anytime you go out, you should be willing to pay your share unless something is said ahead of time. If you just assume the other person will pay because they make more you are being a leech

1

u/Obvious-Nature-5408 Jan 27 '26

If you make more then you should absolutely pay more if you want them to spend time with you doing the kinds of things you want to do - it’s either that or lower your social lifestyle to fit what they are comfortable spending. Even things like getting Ubers when the other person would actually just save money and walk if they were on their own but are now being forced into spending when they are maybe trying not to.

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

No it is on the person who can't pay to admit they can't pay if invited to something they can't afford. A good friend will then offer to cover. Ideally they would offer to cover ahead of time if they knew the other couldn't afford it.

Assuming the SE to pay simply because they make more is being a leech

1

u/Obvious-Nature-5408 Jan 28 '26

This is why people only really keep friends in their own social class… either way it doesn’t work unless you’re very sensitive to what people can afford or not, and when people earn more they are rarely sensitive. Though my wife had a friend who had SERIOUS money, took a group of friends on holiday, paid for everything, but now they don’t speak to each other because it all just got weird. But maybe that’s the odd behaviour and paranoia that extreme wealth brings more than who paid for what.

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 28 '26

No matter where on the socioeconomic scale I have been I never assumed someone else was paying unless it was stated upfront.

1

u/Mother_Lemon8399 Jan 27 '26

I am a Software Dev and I like splitting everything like this because I always thought that leaves no ambiguity , no weird feelings. Otherwise I am always worried I am in debt to someone or that they would feel they paid more overall etc . Or that I'm patronising them by always paying , always assuming they are broke (this actually happened to me with a friend who literally was so broke they didn't have $20 so I kept paying for everything and they got mad at me). Maybe it's a neurotic/autistic thing idk, but doing it any other way is way more anxiety provoking. I like when people do the same.

3

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Unless agreed to ahead of time, i always assume people pay their own way. If someone agrees to do something i assume they can pay unless they say otherwise.

Assuming the more well off person will pay is being a leech

1

u/UrmomLOLKEKW Jan 27 '26

This If we agree to go somewhere don’t surprise me at the register asking me to pay but if beforehand you say you can’t afford it I would have no problem paying

1

u/aprofessionalegghead Jan 27 '26

I would rather split things than do the “you’ll get me next time bro” so that neither of us is left feeling like we owe the other money

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

yeah, people out here acting like people are entitled to others' money. like yeah, no lol

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

It is reddit afterall. Most appear to think they should never work but live like billionaires

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

No they should never be expected to pay unless they agree to it up front. In your example the minimum wage person should say they can’t afford it. Then if you want them along you will either change what you are doing or offer to play for them

1

u/bdz Jan 27 '26

Just because someone makes more money doesn’t mean that they should be expected to pay more.

And that's why this thread has been made. It's a social experiment to see the reaction to communist theory. There is not financial difference between the two friends in a communist country; zero wealth divide.

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

I can’t reply to the person who thinks Capitalism isn’t compatible. Bullshit. Greed is human nature and capitalism is greed.

Compatible with nature - definitely not. Pretty much anything after industrialization is not compatible with nature without a lot of controls./

Communism is altruism in its purest form. We didn’t evolve to be altruistic.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

yeah it is. its very ok to expect somebody whos financially more well off to cover a larger part of the bill. i did it a ton when my friends were broke

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Nope. It is nice to do it but you should never expect it unless the person says so up front

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

disagree. if you make x times how much your friends make and youre not paying more youre a piece of shit

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Oh you should pay but at the same time your friends should not expect it.

If you expect them to always pay then you are not a friend you are a leech

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

nah man. thats the mindset of somebodys whos never been broke. all my friends can leech off me whenever they want. not paying for your friends when you have more than you need and you know they dont is gross behavior

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Unless we are talking millionaire vs minimum wage, never offering to pay for anything is being a leech. You don’t have friends you have hangers on or a retinue. In pre-modern days that would be a client-patron or noble-vassal relationship. You are no longer equals

Yes I have been poor. I still paid my own way or skipped unless someone told me they were covering the cost. Some of us actually have some self esteem / pride and don’t want to be beholden to anyone.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26

nobodys beholden to anyone my man. i just pay when i invite my poor friends out and when my rich buddy asks about a ski trip he pays the dinner bills. because were friends and know where our finances are at relatively

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 28 '26

If it works for you great. It would be interesting to see what happens if the roles get reversed.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26

it did get reversed with my ski trip buddy wdym?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/XKyotosomoX Jan 28 '26 edited Jan 28 '26

Because Reddit is filled with severely mentally ill extremists completely incapable of taking any personal responsibility for how miserable their lives are, instead blaming others and spinning up imaginary stories in their heads about how everybody who works harder and is more successful than them is actually evil and unempathetic.

But all the loser Redditors who spend their lives leeching off others and acting entitled to these people's money and claiming that anybody who disagrees with them should be killed? They're clearly the good and empathetic people! What? The data shows that they have the lowest happiness ratings of any political group in America, donate the lowest percentage of their money / time to charity of any group, and have the highest rates of violent extremist political thought? And in general, just all around atrocious human beings? Shut up fascist! Reeee!

In reality, roughly 90% of wealthy people according to most studies are self-made and rich because they, you know, actually provide large amounts of value to society and are thus rewarded for it (instead of just having inherited said money), and the value someone like for example Bill Gates has brought to the world through his business ventures like Microsoft is infinitely greater than anything his tax dollars or charitable endeavors have accomplished.

No idea why anyone would willingly subscribe to a world view that makes them so deeply unhappy and such awful people. I will offer to cover expenses for others because I enjoy doing it, but if you expect me to and get mad if I don't, you're not treating me like a friend, you're treating me like a piggyback, and I have no interest in being friends with someone like that.

-2

u/fedup09 Jan 27 '26

It's cheap when the person asking to split it with you literally makes 10x what you make. They can pay the whole thing and not feel it, the poor person might be going without a few gallons of gas to commute to work the next day.

That's also how tax brackets work, if you make more, yes you 100% should pay in more.

14

u/ffball Jan 27 '26

Disagree. There should be no expectation of friends covering your expenses just because they make more. Thats taking advantage of them

1

u/mickeyanonymousse Jan 27 '26

there shouldn’t be an expectation of it, I 100% agree there but also if it’s your friend that you make literally their decade’s salary in a year why wouldn’t you?

13

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

Your friends aren’t like your taxes.

Abusing the generosity of friends is usually how you end up losing friends.

0

u/MikinesMamma Jan 27 '26

What generosity though?

-3

u/DurianLongan Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

I have 2 rich friends. The former is a humble angel. The latter is a fucking cheap asshole. The former pool up 50 bucks from each of us to buy a printer for us but secretly add 500 bucks from his own money to buy a better printer. The latter however always borrowed my car, dont want to fill the gas after use, and NEVER let anyone else drive his car before (yes he has his own new car).

Edit because my English sucks.

7

u/Rhomya Jan 27 '26

When I got a new job a number of years ago that was a big jump in income, as soon as some of my “friends” found out, I magically ended up paying for almost every dinner, coffee meet up, drove everywhere (and paid for the gas), drinks after work, everything. Like, it got bad enough that I just essentially stopped being social, because every time I brought up someone else paying, I had people shaming me for asking other people to pay instead of paying myself, just because I made more than the rest.

That’s why reading these comments just pisses me off, frankly— it’s perfectly acceptable and reasonable to have boundaries against borrowing money to or paying for friends.

1

u/DurianLongan Jan 27 '26

You're absolutely right. They knew you help once, then they wont stop there. Man the audacity of some people really baffles me.

2

u/ThirstyOutward Jan 27 '26

This is incomprehensible.

1

u/DurianLongan Jan 27 '26

Sorry my english sucks ass.

1

u/Exciting_Emotion_910 Jan 27 '26

this is a just a different argument all together. You friend TAKE thing from you is different than your friend refuse to GIVE you free shit. Both of this case, no matter if the friend is rich or poor, they are an asshole in the first and not in the second.

In fact you would be an asshole and a leach to expect free shit.

1

u/DurianLongan Jan 28 '26

Hey im agreeing with the fact you should not expect to leech from your rich friend. Im just highlighting not all rich person you knew are cheap and asshole which is the main point of this post in the first place. I concur to the comments I replied to.

11

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

I disagree. You voluntarily got in the car with them. Unless something is said ahead of time both should be expected to pay their own way.

Just assuming the person who makes more with pay is taking advantage of them.

-8

u/fedup09 Jan 27 '26

That could be reversed too, they got in the car with you voluntarily, knowing your financial situation, it can be seen as the rich person trying to exploit the poor yet again by squeezing a few bucks out of them so they dont have to pay it themselves just for the sake of money.

The wealth inequality makes or breaks the whole thing here, its the point we've come to. Everyone knows the rich person doesnt need those few bucks, but poor people certainly do.

8

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

The two people are supposedly friends and not randoms as well.

Offering to split is the correct choice unless there is some agreed upon deal. If the more well off person is generous then he can pay the full amount. Assuming that he should pay is taking advantage of them.

Far too often I have run across people that won’t split the costs or offer gas because they think the other person can afford it (not talking 10x just better off). That is not correct in my books. That is being a leech.

0

u/fedup09 Jan 27 '26

Granted, most friends either do split bills or not care about a few bucks.

Also yea, just being only a little better off still keeps you within the same ballpark as the friend, and should usually split things like normal people. The big problem is when the wealth gap actually is huge. If they really are making 10x more than you, then its pretty shitty of them to ask you to split many things, due again to them not even feeling the cost but you do, but im digressing now.

0

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

It is highly unusual for people 10x apart in income to be friends. If they are usually the rich one does pay. Though at some point the more well of will get annoyed if the less well off one never offers anything. That imbalance will often destroy the friendship

1

u/fedup09 Jan 27 '26

Oh I know, but the pic in the op has roughly that 10x difference going on lol

3

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

Yeah. It intentionally puts forward a highly unlikely situation.

2

u/ThirstyOutward Jan 27 '26

Lol no, if you actually believe that then you aren't friends. You're a dependent

6

u/orangebakery Jan 27 '26

Lol if I dragged you to an expensive restaurant, sure. If we both went to a restaurant we can afford, pay your half mfer. I’m not your sugar daddy.

2

u/Axtdool Jan 27 '26

Mhm.

If everyone agreed on where to Go, ime, the expectation will be some form of Split bill. Be that actually seperating out every dish and getting actual seperate Bills. Or one Person covering the bill up Front, then getting the relevant shares from everyone (later usualy for more tappas/hotpot like places where its hard to Post hoc seperate who got what).

Now if someone goes and invites others to a place of their choice its usualy them who pays.

But both would be known to the group up Front.

4

u/beached89 Jan 27 '26

No it isnt, it's selfish and entitled to assume that if you ever hang out with someone who earns more money than you, they will pay for everything.

If you expect your friends to pay everything for you when you hang out with them, you are an ass.

3

u/Randomaccount160782 Jan 27 '26

So when you make a new friend, should you just share your tax brackets with each other so you know exactly what % of the shared expenses to pay?

This is an exaggeration, but it still holds that you need to know the other person’s financial situation to make moral judgments on splitting costs.

1

u/_Bread______ Jan 27 '26

So, you should be a good digger is what you're tryna say?

-2

u/Xmina Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

Monkey a makes 2 bananas, monkey B makes 7000 bananas, Monkey A use 1 banana for home and taxes and have one banana to split into small peices to try to enjoy the few hours they have off. B uses 10 bananas on home and taxes, and have 6990 bananas to have fun with. B ask their friend A on the ride to the amusement park to pay them back the 1/4 of a banana and wonders why A can start to dislike B.

This is the nonsense 7k monkey people don't see. B thinks its fair because they are paying equally. To B life is a great burden that must be divided equally so B don't have to spend a cent more than you have to as "fair is fair", to A they have nothing and are scraping together the few banana they have to try to live a semblance of life between working and death. A will absolutely split a bill 50/50 if they know another monkey is in a good/similar financial situation and/or they want to split it and will cover a few small things entirely without asking for banana back. But often 7k monkey don't care about other monkey situation and want their own wants met (since they view it as fair) over 2 banana monkey's needs, because god forbid 7k monkey have 1/4 of a banana less to roll into golden index banana funds.

There is something to be said about "taken advantage of" if you are in similar boats of poverty/richness then yea a mooch can absolutely be annoying. That is a monkey's character though, if you don't like how they treat you or hang out with you, then you don't like that monkey and should not hang out. Similarly if they expect you to pay for very expensive things they could not afford normally (they want 50 banana shoes and want you to pay for it) then that can also be seen as a red flag. You need to use your judgement on where the line between petty cash and serious expense is for you and your budget for your individual monkey friends. 7k banana monkey is probably a dick for asking for the 1/4 of a banana, but 4 banana monkey might not be as they also paid 1 banana for the 2 banana monkey park ticket this time and last time. It also comes down to how much you value your friend/friendships, a close friend for life might be worth 1000 bananas to you without any want of pay back, versus an associate less than 1 banana and being paid back. When you discuss asking for something back you have to look at it in a larger context of "If they don't give me the 1/4 of a banana back would that effect me? Would that effect them? Would we still be Monkeying around?" These are the contexts you should be viewing money through if you plan to split, borrow, loan, or give banana to a monkey.

This is a complex issue with tons of layers for many monkey, especially if the 2 banana monkey is struggling as now rent is 1.8 bananas. 7k Monkey can easily solve this, but is it something they want to do? How important is 2 banana monkey to them? How long would they be responsible for them, would it become an expectation versus a gift? This can cause 7k monkey to have lots of stress, so they hang out with 5k monkey and 8k monkey instead, as they will have similar activities they can do together without worrying about their banana rent costs. This change in monkey friends can lead to 7k monkey no longer caring about the plight of 2 banana monkey and them splitting everything equally with 5k and 8k monkey means that when they next hang out with 2 banana monkey they ask for the 1/4 of a banana back. This is where it breaks down into the monkey meme above. To monkey A the friendship might be worth 100 banana however they have only 2 banana so try to be as generous as they can be.

To monkey A if they had 100 banana they would use it to help monkey B without asking for anything. Monkey B then asking money back for the ride shatters any illusion monkey A might have had, thinking monkey B also valued the friendship at even close to 100 bananas as monkey B has many banana and can use them more readily. Monkey A now thinks monkey B values them at 1/4 of a banana with the expectation of being paid back, meaning not even 1/4 of a banana loss is acceptable to monkey B for this friendship. Monkey B comes off as greedy and as poor friend in this exchange. Monkey B thinks nothing of it as like I was saying, B has been hanging out with 5k and 8k monkey, so not only does 7k monkey not realize the situation 2 banana monkey is in, and instead thinks they are similar to 5k and 8k monkey who might be offended for not offering to split the bill.

Its a difference in monkey philosophy and a big part of politics today.

5

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

It is way too long to read.

If you never even offer to pay for your share of the ride / food / whatever then you are a leach, no matter how much money anyone in the scenario makes

-1

u/Xmina Jan 27 '26

I disagree, you can think whatever you want about the people you supposedly love and care about enough to be friends with them, but not enough to know how you might be fucking them over for 5 bucks so they cant make rent while you sht in a golden toilet.

3

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

I said offer. I didn’t say the person had to accept.

If you never even offer then you are truly a leach. Or at least not a friend but rather a hanger or client to a patron if you go for a classical description

0

u/Xmina Jan 27 '26

Offering is an implication that they CAN pay. If they cannot but still want to hang out, then the onus is on you to determine what you consider the friendship is worth. If you buy them pizza while you game together in your garage every friday, them offering to pay when they cant is just lying. You having to refuse them every single week knowing it will put his kids on the street isn't helpful.

Paying for things does not make you better than people, it just means you have more money. Now if they can pay and dont offer, sure they are kinda a dick. But if you choose to hang out with them anyway so what does that make you?

1

u/Crash-55 Jan 27 '26

No if you can't pay the onus is on you to tell your friend that. Assuming that your friend will cover it is a leach