This problem is even worse when it's not even necessarily income levels that is the problem, but just different values around money & spending. If you have the same income level, but find it outrageous to spend x on y, you just get viewed as a "cheap ass"
It's not my fault I don't want to pay 13 dollars+tip for a cocktail when I can make 20 of them at home for the same price.
Most of that drink's $13 is paying for the venue in which you consumed it. Frankly, I also dont really get why it's so much more fun to drink with friends in expensive and crowded spaces than our own spaces, but I appreciate that's a minority view.
> It's not my fault I don't want to pay 13 dollars+tip for a cocktail when I can make 20 of them at home for the same price.
Oh, certainly not your fault, but you might be better staying at home. Why agree to go out somewhere with your friends if you are just going to drink water?
> It's not my fault I don't want to pay 13 dollars+tip for a cocktail when I can make 20 of them at home for the same price.
Then stay the hell home, please. Everybody will be happier.
When I organize something like this either A) I think the cocktails/beer/food/etc. is genuinely amazing and if you don't then you should stay home or B) I'm more interested in the company and I think the ambiance is acceptable.
This. It's not even about whether one can afford things, but the unfairness of splitting the bill. I have an anecdote where a friend of mine had 2 glasses of juice, while her friends were drinking wine and all sorts. When her part of the bill was $4 she ended up paying $50 (currency approxm, but you get the point).
Even with similar incomes, as young adults in our mid-20's, working hard for our money, we'd like more control over what we end up paying for.
I understood mjevans as saying that they thus should have not split the bill evenly (and their friends should not insist on it), for exactly those reasons?
I don't follow your logic at all. The person in this article is saying that people are being cheap by not just splitting the bill evenly. I'm pointing out that if everyone did that it would put people with less money at a huge disadvantage. The fact is my friends did not do this, and now that things like venmo exist it's even easier to manage this.
> I don't follow your logic at all. The person in this article is saying that people are being cheap by not just splitting the bill evenly.
Could be a cultural thing. I live in a small town of a rather poor country. Where I live, friends pay in turns, today I'll pay and the next time he'll pay and so forth... and not even very strict turns[1]. If could split the check in half, that's acceptable. Splitting the bill to the cent would leave you with no friends in no time.
[1]: That said, food here is cheap (dirt cheap compared to the US). If you go to the capital, it's different. I noticed that people there split the bill, but restaurants/food costs 2x or 3x up, so paying the whole thing is expensive.
Also situational. When I was at university, if we went out anywhere, you'd just pay for your food/drinks individually. Now we're all in a position where money isn't as tight, buying rounds of drinks and not paying close attention to who's turn it is or the price of the drinks is much more common.
Probably variable. I've said a few times that I can't afford to go out, and had friends offer to pay (to be paid back if/when I can afford it), and it never really bothered me (I was extremely grateful to have such good friends TBH).
I did make sure to pay them back when I could (a few months later), and when I had a bit more money a few years later made sure to buy them all a few rounds of drinks though.
