[HN Gopher] How to spend money on your friends without it lookin...
___________________________________________________________________
How to spend money on your friends without it looking like bribery
Author : Kortaggio
Score : 281 points
Date : 2023-04-28 12:06 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (billmei.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (billmei.net)
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| I was expecting an article about how to spend money on your
| friends so they don't feel like you're going to ask them favours
| in return.
|
| Turns out the article is not about this at all. But.
|
| Dammit, I can likely afford to take some friends to a (local)
| restaurant and pay the whole bill, no questions asked about
| contents of those fancy drinks. I'm very unlikely to have time or
| skill to cook for 14 myself. I would go to a restaurant with
| someone after making sure that them volunteering to pay the bill
| is not a "yes, but actually no". If someone invited me to a home
| party I would certainly feel more than obligated to participate
| in bringing in produce, booze, and sharing the labour of
| preparing the food and cleaning up after.
|
| I can afford to rent some place to escape, but _owning_ a whole
| cottage on the cape? Are you saying it 's better to own a cottage
| just so that invitation is not awkward for you? I can't wrap my
| head around the concept. I would surely be curious about the
| costs of having such a thing.
|
| The whole feel of the piece is incredibly first world to me. The
| author (and their friends) seem like people who would smirk at
| you if you only had one yacht, or if your golf course was too
| small. Book a hotel, and it's awkward. Just buy a cottage
| instead.
| barrysteve wrote:
| Shallow meaning.
|
| - Ownership is also a negative, you pay for upkeep, maintenance,
| admin and inventory of a house. You keep the wealth AND the
| costs.
|
| - When you go to someone's house for dinner, you're not being
| bribed, you're relating to the owner of the house. The way you
| relate to the owner and their friends, influences your future
| friendship.
|
| - The home owner is not temporarily letting friends access his
| house. His friends can't rifle through his drawers and live at
| his house. He is inviting them in for dinner. At most, you are
| sharing a portion of his house and his hospitality for an
| evening.
|
| - If you buy stuff for me, I'll say thank you, but honestly I
| don't always want what you intend to buy for me. If you're not
| going to relate to my meaning and values, even when you're being
| "generous", then what's the point of being a friend?
|
| Money and physical goods among non-poor adults, are not a
| "default win" in friendships. The real generousity in buying a
| gift is relating to what the other person cares about and giving
| a small token of that.
|
| Wealthy people have many friends. It's always true, unless the
| wealthy person rejects it. People elect themselves to be friends
| with the wealthy.
|
| Money, gifts and generosity can't buy friendship from people who
| don't relate the way you do.
|
| I get this site is mostly about programming, startups and money,
| but jeepers. Did we lose the middle way and common sense so
| quickly?
| squokko wrote:
| I had a friend who was the son of a billionaire who threw
| elaborate dinner parties at his house and he very generously
| asked for $20 for each attendee. The food obviously cost more
| than $20 but paying the $20 made us feel like we weren't
| freeloading.
| jameshart wrote:
| I mean, it can definitely still look like bribery.
|
| In business relationships we all know that inviting a potential
| client out to dinner, paid for by the vendor, creates at least
| the possible impression of impropriety unless the amount spent is
| relatively modest. Doing the same for, say, the government
| inspector from your industry's regulatory body... looks even
| worse.
|
| If the vendor has a sponsorship arrangement with a sports team
| that means they already have access to a corporate box, that
| doesn't change the fact that the hospitality offer looks...
| dubious.
|
| The nature of your ownership/rental of the assets involved has no
| bearing on this. The nature of how it affects your power
| relationship with the recipient is what matters.
|
| The standard - especially when it comes to dealing with
| government employees - is 'avoid even the appearance of
| impropriety', right?
|
| Or at least I certainly thought it was until reading about the
| Clarence Thomas situation. Apparently there are different rules
| for billionaires.
| metalspot wrote:
| > avoid even the appearance of impropriety
|
| the real world standard is don't do anything that knowingly or
| intentionally violates the law or your employers policies.
|
| anyone can falsely claim that what you are doing is wrong but
| as long as it doesn't break employer policy or law then they
| are wrong.
|
| in the corporate world it would be suicidal to "avoid the
| appearance of impropriety" because your competitors will
| slaughter you while they are following the letter of the law.
| jameshart wrote:
| Most (serious) employers' code of conduct policies are 'don't
| do anything that risks the appearance of impropriety*
|
| * without talking to legal first'
|
| So I take your point. But the FCPA and rules around federal
| government gift-giving mean that in practice companies are
| generally cautious about this sort of thing.
| metalspot wrote:
| > companies are generally cautious about this sort of thing
|
| yeah, they hire lobbyists to do it for them so they don't
| have culpability, but you are right.
| dclowd9901 wrote:
| Right. What makes it look like bribery isn't the transaction.
| It's the nature of the relationship itself.
|
| Is there a great earnings imbalance? Is there ever a way for
| the friend to treat you in kind?
|
| Are you and this friend close friends?
|
| I wouldn't think twice about making the trip to a summer house
| one of my good friends rented. I might offer to kick some money
| over, but it wouldn't feel awkward or obligated. Just want to
| show my appreciation.
|
| If this is someone I don't particularly like, it changes the
| whole exchange. Why am I going? Why do they want me to go? With
| the change of the type of relationship, none of it is kosher.
| ilyt wrote:
| In business relations I treat is _basically_ as payment for
| your time to listen to them, assuming it is something
| reasonable.
|
| Over that, well, I have no respect for the sales professional
| that does that so I will feel absolutely fine not giving them
| business regardless on how much they spend on bribery.
| jameshart wrote:
| Which creates a conflict when you are already being paid for
| your time by the employer whose custom is being sought. So
| I'm not sure that is an ethical blank check on vendor gifts.
| floatrock wrote:
| In a round-about way, this article is really talking about how to
| holistically enrich one's life: there's other forms of Capital
| beyond Financial Capital, and something out there makes us feel
| icky when there's too much focus on Financial Capital.
|
| Depending on the specific guru you're reading, there's
| 3/5/8/whatever "Forms of Capital". A 5-framework is something
| like:
|
| - Financial Capital
|
| - Material Capital
|
| - Social Capital
|
| - Intellectual Capital
|
| - Human Capital
|
| An 8-framework might split something like "Human" into
| Experiential, Spiritual, Cultural, and Living.
|
| Point is, when we adopt the everything-is-transactional lens, we
| tend to see everything as exchanges of Financial Capital. And we
| lose sight of our other deep monkey-brain needs, like a sense of
| community and social belonging.
|
| So inviting someone to your personal beachhouse rather than
| vacation rental doesn't "feel" like bribery because it's closer
| to trading Social or Experiential Capital rather than Financial
| Capital. And, for better or worse, "bribes" is (colloquially)
| closely tied just to Financial Capital.
|
| (It becomes nefarious when you exploit this feeling mismatch to,
| say, trade types of capital with your judicial buddy in ways that
| look awfully close to a supreme influence on a political case...)
| eljimmy wrote:
| I think mentioning that you're paying the cheque is tacky. Just
| invite them and pay for their meal silently as a nice surprise to
| the end of dinner.
| roenxi wrote:
| These situations are logically equivalent and the differences are
| fairly subtle. It would be interesting to know whether most
| people would be able to pick the difference between the two
| approaches.
|
| I suppose it is a higher-status play to have spare resources
| available instead of having to deplete your finances to do
| favours for friends. Maybe one approach suggests a deeper
| understanding of other people's needs which is good signalling.
| But at the end of the day if you give someone something with no
| strings attached, that is what happened. The method isn't so
| important.
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| I highly recommend an episode of How To with John Wilson titled
| "How to Split the Check"
|
| https://youtu.be/LsMdnCO7AOA
| yieldcrv wrote:
| The dinner party example isnt so cut and dry
|
| It does feel more comfortable to not be expected to be paying for
| anything
|
| But its also common to chip in, amongst my loosely affiliated
| friends. Or its a potluck to begin with.
|
| When its the host cooking, yeah you're just there and partaking.
|
| On the other far extreme, its my friends have private chefs, and
| I know thats even more expensive than the host cooking, but yeah
| that also has no charge expected.
| marpstar wrote:
| I love picking up the check but I _never_ tell my guests ahead of
| time. I don 't want them compromising on their order, or feeling
| weird until they absolutely have to. I guess this _does_ require
| friends who 'd be willing/able to pick up their own tab, but it's
| only a few times a year.
|
| I've got a lot more than I need and I'd rather spend it giving
| friends a night out than on more toys. I don't want or expect the
| same in return, just a "thanks" and a good time together.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| Eh. Just so you know depending on the cost of the place and the
| situation of your guests then this can be really stressful for
| them.
|
| I've been in a lot of situations in the past where I've been
| making okay money but had friend/coworkers who were making very
| good money. They pick expensive place. It's unclear if this is
| work or social. I cant really afford to buy a $75 dollar steak,
| an appetizer, and a bottle of wine but I take the backseat and
| follow their lead. Bill is expensive. They cover it but the
| entire dinner I was worried that I might be on the hook for
| half of a $250-$500 dinner bill.
|
| I've been in that same situation and someone said clearly, "Hey
| this is on me, get whatever you'd like" and I feel comfortable
| and can actually enjoy it. If they are my friend I take them at
| their word that they are comfortable paying for it.
| Aeolun wrote:
| Honestly, if a place is way out of my price range (what I'm
| willing to pay, even if I could afford it), that's something
| you say before you enter right (so your friend can
| potentially say they'll pay for you)? If you do enter and
| stress out the whole meal I feel you have nobody but yourself
| to blame.
| mortenjorck wrote:
| Thinking about what I'd do on either side...
|
| On the invitee side, I might casually say "oh, Steak 48 might
| be a little rich for my blood!"
|
| On the inviter side, I might take that opportunity to
| discreetly tell them "don't worry about it."
|
| Somehow an exchange like that feels a lot less awkward to me
| than either the invitation stating it up front or prolonged
| ambiguity.
| mock-possum wrote:
| yep, these kinds of discussions are frustrating for me,
| because it seems so clear that open honest communication
| proves them a non-issue. If you can't afford something, say
| so. If you'd like compensation or reciprocation for
| something, say so. If you want to cover everything, say so.
|
| Letting fear of the conversation prevent you from having it
| makes the issue worse, not better.
| marpstar wrote:
| Point taken. I'd say I've never brought along anyone who was
| unclear about who was paying (i.e. these are friends and
| presume they're paying their own way because this isn't
| work), but I guess you can never be too sure.
| conformist wrote:
| The vacation home example somehow actually feels less awkward to
| me, perhaps because my visit doesn't change the cost incurred by
| the friend when they're renting? (Whereas the restaurant bill
| feels very awkward and transactional, because the increase is
| directly related to what I order.)
| colanderman wrote:
| I think the rented vacation home can cut the other way as well
| -- a friend may feel obligated to come _because_ you spent the
| money already and expected a guest -- and if they can 't come,
| they'll feel bad about it.
|
| The way I navigated a similar situation was -- book the home
| for a week, and invite several friends to stay for a few nights
| when/if they're able. The cost isn't an issue then, it's clear
| that I was benefitting the most (being the only one there for
| the full week). And because several friends were invited, no
| one felt a specific obligation to come to make my rental "worth
| it".
| munificent wrote:
| _> book the home for a week, and invite several friends to
| stay for a few nights when /if they're able._
|
| I've done this before too and it was one of the best
| vacations I've ever taken. I got a house for a couple of
| weeks and told a handful of friends they're welcome to drop
| in whenever but to coordinate with the others so that there's
| always enough beds to go around.
|
| It meant I got a nice long vacation. And just when I would be
| getting bored, a new friend or two would show up.
| Semaphor wrote:
| > I think the rented vacation home can cut the other way as
| well -- a friend may feel obligated to come because you spent
| the money already and expected a guest -- and if they can't
| come, they'll feel bad about it.
|
| Yeah, that was my line of thinking. The invite itself isn't
| awkward, sounds fun. But taking as it is without context, it
| suddenly becomes an obligation forced upon me.
| michaelt wrote:
| _> The vacation home example somehow actually feels less
| awkward to me, perhaps because my visit doesn't change the cost
| incurred by the friend when they're renting?_
|
| I assume the author is considering the example of someone
| _spending substantially more than they otherwise would have_ to
| accommodate guests.
|
| For a couple to rent a holiday home with 1 bedroom and invite
| friends to visit for the day, or sleep on the couch, would be
| different to the same couple renting a 6-bedroom luxury
| mansion.
| ghaff wrote:
| I've had friends pick up the meal for a group at the end (as I
| have as well)--certainly for one other person it's pretty
| natural so long as one person isn't the one habitually paying.
|
| But I agree the restaurant thing feels a bit more
| transactional.
|
| The vacation home thing seems pretty normal. Hey, I'm renting
| this place and would like some company. As an invitee, I'd
| probably ask to bring some food or whatever but seems pretty
| normal.
| hnbad wrote:
| Yeah, with the dinner the payment is influenced by whether you
| come and what you order. With the vacation home it's already
| paid for.
|
| Friends of ours literally invited us to come visit them during
| their vacation and stay at the rented vacation home because it
| had a spare bedroom. It didn't feel as awkward as the author
| makes it out to be, though we did feel the need to ask for
| reassurance that we weren't inconveniencing them. We also
| didn't stay for the full term.
| w10-1 wrote:
| It's not the bribery but the reciprocity and equality. When does
| it create an obligation?
|
| Another example is bringing food or drink. Generally when we
| bring comestibles to share, no one expects to have to
| reciprocate, because we're all sharing. But if you offer the host
| a gift, it creates entanglements.
|
| Generally I try to shift the frame to the shared activity -
| eating, brainstorming, gaming, etc. so people feel that if they
| are participating, they are contributing.
|
| For dinners out, I don't think rich people should presume they
| have the right to pay before anyone gets a chance to contribute.
| It takes away the agency of others.
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| This was... Weird.
|
| Like, none of the "awkward examples" really track as awkward?
|
| I genuinely don't get the point of this article.
| jameshart wrote:
| Also the mapping from 'awkwardness' to 'looks like bribery'
| seems assumed and not justified.
| mukti wrote:
| To me, if you compare an interaction with friends as feeling
| like bribery, I question the friendship a bit. Maybe its just
| me, but spending money/time/whatever in any way with/for
| friends shouldn't feel that way..
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| Yeah, if there's such a feeling in what should be a normal
| interaction, I'd question the friendship
| gallamine wrote:
| How would you rate the amount of financial disparity between
| yourself and friends/family?
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| Pretty huge disparity in some cases.
|
| It has never really been an issue or caused
| awkwardness/weirdness.
| SergeAx wrote:
| Now, THIS is the first compelling reason to own a yacht and not
| charter it. Never thought of it this way.
| d--b wrote:
| I've had friends invite me in houses they rented. I invited
| friends in houses I rented.
|
| I invented people at restaurants, I've been invited to
| restaurants. I cooked for friends, and friends cooked for me.
|
| What's weird? I don't understand.
|
| EDIT: I am not talking about reciprocation, I was invited to
| restaurants I couldn't really afford by people richer than me, I
| invited poorer people to restaurants and to vacations, etc.
| cogman10 wrote:
| Sometimes people can't reciprocate because they don't have the
| means. They can't rent a house or take you out to a restaurant.
|
| That makes them feel uncomfortable.
| wrmanis wrote:
| In my case it's an issue of relative income - I have a large
| group of friends that have been together for more than a decade
| and our income levels have dramatically diverged. We're very
| comfortable with each other but there's an undercurrent of
| social implication whenever we go out to somewhere on the nicer
| side, or somewhere that's a little out of their normal routine.
|
| Like several other commenters in this thread, I have more than
| I need and really enjoy spending time with my friends, so I
| naturally pick up the bill whenever I can. My friends are
| appreciative, but they also feel awkward about going out with
| me sometimes because it feels like they're implicitly asking me
| to pay, which in their minds is unfair and uncouth. It also
| could be interpreted as me suggesting that they _couldn 't_ pay
| for themselves.
|
| Another layer of this is that most of my friends were raised in
| Asian cultures, where fighting over the bill is normal and even
| expected. It's hard to fight for a $500 restaurant bill for 10
| people on near minimum wage, so you can imagine some real mixed
| emotions when the server obviously doesn't want to split it.
| I'll pick it up every time, but it's naturally a hit to your
| pride when compounded over the years no matter how gracious you
| are about it.
|
| Like the OP of the article, I spend a lot of time thinking
| about the dynamics at play here. I love and respect my friends,
| but frankly a weekend at an AirBnB the beach or even a modest
| ski vacation is just out of their price range most of the time.
| Sometimes it really is easier if you phrase it with a little
| white lie about how it came to be in order to preserve their
| pride, because the real important thing is getting to spend
| time together.
| gtirloni wrote:
| In some cultures, it could create a situation where you are
| showing you're better than me and the person would feel
| humiliated. It's about the socioeconomic status[0] and how each
| person values that. In some countries that's valued more than
| other things like, say, being a kind person.
|
| The author of this article seems to have lived in US/Canada
| which are very capitalist societies where people are expected
| to work hard and gather a lot of monetary resources. In these
| societies, showing you're better off than your friend might be
| considered a bad thing. People often hide things they bought or
| don't talk about that new house because it would create an
| awkward situation where people are comparing their
| socioeconomic status to others.
|
| Is it stupid? Yes, but that's life.
|
| 0 - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-psychology-
| of...
| antisthenes wrote:
| I can't even imagine what the relationship needs to be like
| where bringing some takeout and a 6-pack of beer would be
| considered as 1 person showing themselves to be better than
| another.
|
| But it certainly wouldn't be called friendship.
| gtirloni wrote:
| The article mentions inviting 12 people to a GreenOlive
| restaurant and paying all expenses, not a 6-pack of beer.
|
| Either way, you can interpret it as you wish.
| [deleted]
| washadjeffmad wrote:
| Reciprocity differs culturally. My Japanese family get very
| uncomfortable if they receive gifts without having any prepared
| in return, and there's a sense of stress and urgency that
| doesn't let up until they've repaid. It's not negatively
| reciprocal, but it is immediately generalized.
|
| Most of my American family uses delayed reciprocity. Gifts are
| gifts, totally unidirectional, and no one keeps a tally. Some
| people only receive kindness and rarely "pay out". The price of
| having family close is expecting that and making sure people
| are comfortable with being hosted. There's often a little
| pressure to offer to pay depending on the expense, whether by
| thanks, gifts, or cash. Some of them, however, only give things
| or do things for others so they can ask for something in
| return. They're not gifts as much as leashes.
|
| Our Middle Eastern family are perpetual hosts. Not allowing
| them to host and treat you is akin to walking out on a tab in
| the US or trying to pay for something for a Japanese person.
| Even thinking about paying them back might actually be
| considered haram.
|
| We have some older first-generation Filipino family friends who
| invited us to a home cooked dinner at their house... and then
| handed us a bill at the end of the meal. We were very confused
| until their children apologetically explained that it's
| customary to chip in for being hosted.
|
| Weird is, of course, relative, but in places with extreme
| wealth inequality like the US, there can be tension between
| people who don't share either a mutual understanding of
| expectation or a way to reciprocate an expense. Nothing feels
| worse than accepting what you believed to be a gift and having
| the other person bring up how much it cost them or how much
| they've done for you for the rest of your life.
| Aeolun wrote:
| > there's a sense of stress and urgency that doesn't let up
| until they've repaid
|
| Which then only causes the same thing to happen to whomever
| they've now 'repaid' to. There's this weird network of gift
| giving between all the moms in our street that all feel
| obliged to each other for our kids playing together (they
| were in their house for 30 minutes? Oh no, better prepare a
| gift!).
| throwaway2203 wrote:
| > We have some older first-generation Filipino family friends
| who invited us to a home cooked dinner at their house... and
| then handed us a bill at the end of the meal
|
| That's crazy to me, TIL.
| ryandrake wrote:
| I agree. When I finished the article, I thought: File this one
| under "Problems I'd love to have." I can't imagine agonizing
| over any of the examples in the article, and I don't see the
| difference. I have a tiny handful of friends with gobs of money
| and that doesn't make hanging out with them awkward, regardless
| of who pays. Honestly, if one of them were to rent a house in
| some exotic location and invited me, I'd be thrilled! The
| article feels like it is from some alternate universe.
| ilyt wrote:
| When I was poor(ish, not "can't afford food" poor) that never
| really was a problem either. For parties we often just pooled
| the money and went shopping for food/alcohol, or sometimes
| host provided the food for BBQ with guests getting and paying
| for alcohol.
|
| Events when host paid for food/alcohol were usually only
| birthdays, and, well, then you "paid" with gifts.
| sznio wrote:
| Yeah. Inviting people to a rented house you live in doesn't
| feel weird - it's where you live at after all. They're paying
| it no matter if you arrive or not.
|
| But if it was a rented AirBnB just for the occasion I'd
| certainly feel the obligation to chip in on the bill.
| Aeolun wrote:
| I think it's this idea that they've rented it to entertain
| you. If someone had rented a place regardless of whether or
| not I show up I feel much more comfortable not paying.
| thelittleone wrote:
| I don't mean to be the grammar police... but inventing people
| at a restaurant is quite a delightful mistake.
| [deleted]
| intrasight wrote:
| I don't understand either - and I get that it's probably a
| cultural thing.
|
| But how you present it still matters - which I think the
| article doesn't quite address.
|
| Every year I host an event at a restaurant in the city where I
| grew up. It's an opportunity to gather and see my old friends.
| I pay for it. Costs perhaps $2k. I don't ask for contributions
| but several friends give me cash afterwards, which I accept.
|
| Next year I'm gonna spend a month in Italy. I rented a villa in
| Tuscany. Decided to get a three bedroom so friends can come and
| visit. Several said they would, and asked how much they should
| contribute. I said they don't have to contribute towards the
| rental but can pay for events when we're there.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| The subtlety in this article is real.
|
| While logically money is fungible, it is the illusion of not
| seeing the transaction happens that makes people feel welcome to
| enjoy hospitality in case of a friends beach house, dinner guest,
| catered party guest, etc. As soon as there is an explicit,
| incrementally attributable transaction triggered by their
| attendance, people often feel compelled to offer cash.
|
| If you invite people over for dinner & cook, or its a catered
| party, they all feel comfortable. As soon as you order takeout or
| ask what they want, they feel compelled to split the check. Even
| more so when dining out. Even the difference between ordering an
| array of dishes in advance vs asking what they want / ordering
| once they've arrived totally changes how people respond.
|
| It gets very awkward when you are trying to host & treat people,
| but they insist on compensating with cash.
|
| For me, I don't get the point of having wealth/resources if I
| can't share them freely. Especially if you come from a more
| modest background and now make 5x what some of your
| friends/family do.
| cogman10 wrote:
| What I've learned with my in-laws is to stop worrying about it.
| Some people are going to be jealous/angry anytime you spend
| money.
|
| For example, whenever we go to visit them we get a hotel or
| rent a car. Perfectly normal right? Well to some of my in-laws
| that's "Throwing money around and in our faces" Even though the
| alternative is sleeping on the floor in their home and begging
| them for rides.
|
| And, I get it. They can't afford to grab a hotel and car like
| we can so it does look like a crazy luxury.
|
| I'll grab tabs and pay for things, I don't really care. I never
| have. But I was somewhat surprised to find people just
| generally upset when I do things for myself.
| doubled112 wrote:
| That isn't my in-laws. That is the way my mother feels about
| me and my family.
|
| Everything is a luxury. Everything is a waste of money.
| Nobody should have fun or enjoy something.
|
| Sorry life didn't work out for you, but I didn't work hard to
| stare at walls and be bitter.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| More & more I find that with money theres growth mindset &
| scarcity mindset and few who have both. Some people are
| great at making more money, some people are great at
| spending as little of their money as possible. Few thread
| the needle on a little bit of both.
|
| So if you come from a scarcity mindset family, it's
| incredibly hard to do anything with them with money if you
| yourself ended up in more of a growth mindset.
|
| It is what it is.
| [deleted]
| birdyrooster wrote:
| Well now it's like if I spend my money it's almost
| necessarily creating carbon and fucking the world more. So
| it's like I don't even feel like I can spend my money if
| that makes any sense. What is the point of all this money
| when you can't use it ethically?
| from wrote:
| Why not just buy carbon offsets?
| ilyt wrote:
| Buying better, more durable things that won't break after
| a year or two is one way to spend more money for less
| environmental impact. Tho the maths on that is kinda
| iffy, as it is hard to tell how much of the "more
| expensive" is "longer, harder production process that
| generates more emissions" and how much is "we put actual
| good engineering into it".
| digging wrote:
| Your existence, and mine, is intrinsically harmful to the
| world. But you have the opportunity to _also_ do good, to
| heal systems. What you can do with your time, money, and
| energy is to shift the balance more toward healing than
| harm. So don 't waste your money on plastic or flights,
| but try to purchase more ethical/sustainable goods (which
| quickly becomes very expensive). Donate to well regarded
| charities. Etc.
| elzbardico wrote:
| We are a part of the world, not a foreign entity. From
| the point of view of evolution, if our existence
| eliminates a bunch of other species, that's how natural
| selection works. This misanthropic view of us as
| intruders in nature is just a throwback to weird ancient
| cults, it is just basically religion, not reason.
| digging wrote:
| What is the point of saying that? Are you trying to get
| people to give up and accept ecological collapse?
|
| Nowhere did I say humans are a foreign entity. I said our
| existence does harm to ecosystems all over the globe.
| That is a fact. We also, uniquely, have the ability to
| choose* whether or not we do that harm, which oxygenating
| bacteria did not. So here I am, advising someone to do
| less harm because doing harm causes them pain, and you're
| saying... what? That choosing to counteract the harm
| we've done is foolish and illogical? That makes no sense.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| My usual response to these types of concerns is "touch
| grass", but if one has the means & concern, theres many
| organizations to fund, green improvements one can make to
| their home (solar, energy storage, heat pumps, efficient
| appliances, insulation, better windows, etc), transport
| (switch to an EV, take trains, stop flying places), plant
| a tree, etc.
|
| I do find in my circles though that the loudest voices
| are also the ones who scoffed at my switch to an EV, but
| fly on vacations 3x/year, so some of it is clearly
| fashion & posturing.
|
| And some of it is counterintuitive as we see Germany shut
| down nuclear plants for "green" reasons, only to have to
| spin back up some coal.
| doubled112 wrote:
| > counterintuitive as we see Germany shut down nuclear
| plants for "green" reasons, only to have to spin back up
| some coal
|
| I've read that Poland is having issues where the grid
| will only support so much, so they need to disable or
| dial back the renewable energy sources because it's
| impossible to turn down or off a coal firing plant.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| In the states a lot of left-coded "environmental review"
| stuff gets used by NIMBYs to block grid improvements /
| new transmission lines.. which ends up being a bigger
| blocker of renewables than the permits for the generation
| itself.
|
| So you end up with multi-year backlogs just to get grid
| connected with new clean energy generation.
| doubled112 wrote:
| Right, everybody wants the change, but nobody wants it to
| affect them. As is tradition.
| aezart wrote:
| Yeah, you have to exactly match electric output to demand
| or things get very bad. Until we have a few more
| breakthroughs in battery technology, we're going to be
| stuck with fossil fuels to make up the gap for variable
| demand. Nuclear can't be ramped up and down quickly, and
| solar and wind just do whatever they want.
|
| As I understand it, a typical strategy for a power
| company is:
|
| - nuclear or similar for the base load that's always
| required
|
| - solar and wind as available
|
| - weather forecasting to determine how much solar and
| wind will be available
|
| - demand forecasting to determine how much power will be
| required at any given time
|
| - natural gas to meet predicted solar and wind shortfalls
|
| - RICE engines and battery storage to handle unexpected
| fluctuations
|
| - contracts to buy and sell power with other nearby power
| companies
| cogman10 wrote:
| > Until we have a few more breakthroughs in battery
| technology, we're going to be stuck with fossil fuels to
| make up the gap for variable demand.
|
| I think we are there. We don't need new breakthroughs we
| need more manufacturing capacity.
|
| LFPs are both cheap and work great for a grid storage and
| now CATL is announcing new sodium batteries which are
| pretty ideal for grid storage (cheap and long life).
| ilyt wrote:
| It does sound like that, honestly, just needs more
| investment and maybe engineering into mode distributed
| storage for the whole renewable stuff.
|
| I'm guessing sweet spot would be something like "big,
| economically efficient battery per street of houses +
| solar on every house", but as it would be shared it needs
| investment and power company have very little incentive
| for it
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Money can replace dependency and attachment, and some people
| get very offended by it. Other people appreciate you not
| burdening them. People are hard to parse.
| test6554 wrote:
| This is one of several standard reactions to people spending
| money. Jealousy, Envy, Disgust, Pity, Ambivalence. It's why
| people of the same social class tend to gravitate toward one
| another. While everyone is different regarding money, people
| of the same social class who have been in that position for a
| while seem to have similar reactions.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| There's also a weird thing of like adjacent class envy more
| than large gaps. Kind of a Narcissism of small differences
| thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_di
| fference...)
|
| At the extreme- Few people are personally envious of Jeff
| Bezos having a nicer house/car/boat/vacation. But the way
| some people in my small middle class hometown react to
| someone who lives in the same town/hood, kids going to same
| school driving a $40k car when they drive a $25k car is
| kind of comically deranged.
| digging wrote:
| This makes sense to me. I came from the service industry
| to tech. I tripled my income in a couple years and was
| very satisfied. Then a coworker got a promotion that I
| felt I deserved, and started making more than me. This
| coworker came from a different background and had always
| been "ahead" of me financially. But suddenly, there was a
| very tangible gap between us. _It could have been me_ , I
| thought. _I could have that so easily_. And I was not
| satisfied with my pay. I found a new job. (I no longer
| care that much. I know that wages are essentially more
| unfair than fair.)
| Aeolun wrote:
| I've heard this from so many people, and I just do not
| see how it matters in practical terms. A car has four
| wheels and an engine. Other than that, as long as it's
| safe and functional, why care what it costs?
| steveBK123 wrote:
| humans are irrational, emotional, illogical beings.. what
| does practical terms have to do with it?
| hgsgm wrote:
| It's a waste of money that could be helping people.
| digging wrote:
| It's signalling.
| vidarh wrote:
| Going from $25k to $40k for a car seems within reach and
| they don't see how that person that they see does
| anything different that makes the difference justified,
| and they might even have personal knowledge of the person
| to make them think that person definitely isn't as
| smart/working as hard/being as deserving as them. But
| with Bezos they don't have a yardstick to go by.
| ilyt wrote:
| Cars are wholly other kind of funny. Get 15 years old
| sports car, especially "looking" sporty, and people will
| look at you like you're trying to show off your wealth
| when they are driving SUV 3x as more expensive as your
| car...
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Yeah car stuff is very funny.
|
| In the grand scheme of things past a certain income level
| as a lump sum cost, they are not a large expense compared
| to housing. Nor is their monthly cost if financed
| particularly expensive next to the ongoing forever cost
| of insuring, fueling/charging, maintaining and garaging
| them. Nor is driving around in a relatively decent &
| recent model vs trying to keep an old model in working
| order with all the maintenance costs.
|
| If you make 6 figures / live in a HCOL area, then the
| difference in a $25k or $40k or $50k car over the course
| of a 10 year life is kind of whatever. The insurance,
| maintenance and gas/charge over that 10 years probably
| adds up to $30k at a bare minimum. Your house probably
| cost $1M.
|
| Even if you trade-in every 4~5 years at the end of the
| warranty period to minimize random maintenance costs,
| then maybe you eat like $3-4k/year of depreciation during
| ownership.. again not a huge number to have a reliable,
| safe, modern car at all times.
|
| The real outsized car costs are incurred with car nerds
| who max out on having more cars than drivers, and/or
| "upgrading" every year, constantly eating max
| depreciation.
| evandale wrote:
| I never really thought of this seriously (or why) until
| reading that "Some Things I Think" post[0] was on here
| yesterday and a few were along the lines of that. Three
| that resonated with me about money:
|
| "People like you more when you are working towards
| something, not when you have it." - Drake
|
| Net worth goes from $0 to $1 million: Ecstasy. Net worth
| goes from $10 million to $1 million: Despondency. Can we
| agree that all wealth is relative?
|
| A lot of people like making money more than they enjoy
| having money. The change, not the accumulated amount, is
| the thrill.
|
| The last one is the biggest mindfuck to me because I can
| relate to it so much. Every single online MMO I play I'm
| happy making tiny amounts of money and watching the balance
| go up. I don't care much for upgrading to bigger and better
| things or end-game content. I played this game called Tibia
| pretty seriously for a period of time and then got bored
| and was going to stop. There were a few months where the
| only thing I would do is log in, do about 6 daily quests I
| enjoyed doing that were dead easy, collect my 1000gp or
| however much it was and walk around town for a bit debating
| if I want to level up before quitting.
|
| [0] https://collabfund.com/blog/thoughts/
| ilyt wrote:
| > Net worth goes from $0 to $1 million: Ecstasy. Net
| worth goes from $10 million to $1 million: Despondency.
| Can we agree that all wealth is relative?
|
| I think that's more because when going down on income
| (regardless of the starting amount and difference), that
| usually comes with having to resign from some luxuries on
| that way. While earning more means experiencing luxuries
| you couldn't afford before.
|
| Like, moving from public transport to nice car vs the
| other way around. Or living in cramped apartment vs nice
| house.
|
| > A lot of people like making money more than they enjoy
| having money. The change, not the accumulated amount, is
| the thrill.
|
| I would not say _a lot_ ; I think there might be some
| self-selection when people focus on making money that
| might just become their hobby and so have higher
| motivation to earn more and more vs focusing on other
| areas in life.
|
| The few well-off people I know don't exactly feel like
| ones making money for money sake
|
| > The last one is the biggest mindfuck to me because I
| can relate to it so much. Every single online MMO I play
| I'm happy making tiny amounts of money and watching the
| balance go up. I don't care much for upgrading to bigger
| and better things or end-game content. I played this game
| called Tibia pretty seriously for a period of time and
| then got bored and was going to stop. There were a few
| months where the only thing I would do is log in, do
| about 6 daily quests I enjoyed doing that were dead easy,
| collect my 1000gp or however much it was and walk around
| town for a bit debating if I want to level up before
| quitting.
|
| I am complete opposite. When I was seriously raiding in
| WoW (we were usually somewhere in top 5 guilds on our
| server) I still did just enough to have money for any
| gear/consumables I needed.
|
| Same in other areas, I _need_ to have some end goal, else
| I don 't have all that much motivation for work or
| getting better pay. Else I'd just burn money on random
| crap (I got better with that over the years)
| doubled112 wrote:
| Thanks for the flashbacks.
|
| Haven't heard anybody mention Tibia since I was in grade
| school. Grade 8, probably.
| caskstrength wrote:
| > Net worth goes from $0 to $1 million: Ecstasy. Net
| worth goes from $10 million to $1 million: Despondency.
| Can we agree that all wealth is relative?
|
| > A lot of people like making money more than they enjoy
| having money. The change, not the accumulated amount, is
| the thrill.
|
| Dunno, to me it looks more like people just want to have
| enough to not need to work 40 hours/week anymore.
| "Thrill" is probably about billionaires like Musk, not
| people getting towards a million in saving.
| caseyohara wrote:
| There's a name for this: loss aversion.
|
| > Loss aversion in behavioral economics refers to a
| phenomenon where a real or potential loss is perceived by
| individuals as psychologically or emotionally more severe
| than an equivalent gain.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion
| foobarian wrote:
| Wow this is exactly how it is for us that it's uncanny. We
| try to say we got a deep discount because we used a
| "website." But we haven't got the courage to try separate
| lodgings yet, it would cause so much trouble heh.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| One trick that works with some is "oh I have lots of hotel
| points from work travel and they were going to expire" kind
| of games. It may even have a shred of truth to it.
|
| For the frugal family members offended by he spending flex,
| they may be happy to see this instead.
| zamnos wrote:
| don't forget airline points! Also don't forget credit
| card points. I'm not treating you to dinner, I got his
| gift card through my discover card and now I got to use
| it
| hgsgm wrote:
| You spend so much money that 3-5% back pays for
| luxuries?!
| Quarrel wrote:
| I do this- I just tell my parents I have a lot of
| frequent flyer points (which I do), but then depending on
| the cost and availability of flights I book whatever is
| most convenient for me.
|
| It's generous, but not cash in your face.
| mettamage wrote:
| > It gets very awkward when you are trying to host & treat
| people, but they insist on compensating with cash.
|
| My friends should feel comfortable with whatever. If they are
| more comfortable splitting then let's do that. Under no
| circumstances will I make the assumption that more money is
| better and less money is bad.
|
| If they are acting out of politeness, that's on them. This is
| especially the case because I tell my friends to be who they
| want to be
| test6554 wrote:
| To some people sharing money is generous. To others it's a flex
| that they can't replicate and it makes them bitter. To others
| it's a sign you can be taken advantage of. To others it's a
| sign that you are not mature financially and are just making
| poor financial decisions.
|
| Just like music, people have different tastes/expectations when
| it comes to money.
| ilyt wrote:
| I only accepts tokens of friendship in most expensive
| currency: time. I do hate getting presents and vastly prefer
| to just go for a beer or barbecue or something
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| When you're a billionaire who has material interests in court
| cases and you just so happen to befriend a justice on said
| court who has nothing in common with you from either a wealth
| or personal background standpoint, then you're attempting to
| buy influence.
|
| There's a zero percent chance that Harlan Crow, a
| generationally wealthy white guy from Dallas, would ever have
| anything to do with Clarence Thomas, a middle class black guy
| from rural Georgia, except that Thomas sits on the US Supreme
| Court.
|
| None.
|
| Crow sought Thomas out to peddle his influence. Thomas
| accepted because (a) he believes he deserves this sort of
| treatment, and (b) there's nothing particularly illegal about
| it because of how fucked the US Constitution is with regards
| to high court appointments.
|
| Thomas isn't the only one, either. He's just the one
| currently in the news.
| bjt wrote:
| How is that relevant to the topic here?
| pc86 wrote:
| It's not, but political hacks of all ideologies will
| waste no time to turn anything into a shrieking fit about
| the topic du jour.
| fiftyfifty wrote:
| This can be a major cultural issue as well. My wife is asian
| and her whole family looses their mind if someone tries to
| pay for a meal at a family get together. It can be a major
| issue of pride in many asian cultures when people try to pay
| for things.
| WXLCKNO wrote:
| I've been paying for a lot of things for my friends recently
| as there is a very large imbalance in wealth between us which
| is more recent.
|
| These are my best friends for the 20 years, same gang and
| they would never ask anything of me and always offered to
| contribute.
|
| I still felt sort of akward about how I was approaching it.
| Even if we tell each other everything and are transparent
| about money.
|
| I wanted to let them know that I don't care about the money
| at all, it's just the experiences that it will allow that
| matter to me and giving back to family and friends makes me
| feel good.
|
| However I have started just acting more normally and not
| insisting on taking care of everything,I think people feel
| better this way.
|
| So this article frames it nicely for the things I will be
| able to contribute still in a way that makes sense.
|
| I imagine that for people with newer or less strong
| friendships it must be even harder to manage.
| noahjk wrote:
| I went through the same thing with a much newer friend. It
| makes sense to you and me logically, but I agree that there
| was a feeling of disconnect that ultimately made me back
| off. I'd rather help financially facilitate more
| opportunities to have a good time, but it just always seems
| to come off as an insult or uncomfortable, no matter how
| it's handled.
|
| I feel like im grossly overpaid for what I do in comparison
| to the much more impactful work that they did, making
| roughly half what I do, so in my eyes it's only fair to
| view it as more of a group thing where we can contribute
| relatively equivalent amounts rather than strictly split
| amounts? You know?
| alwaysbeconsing wrote:
| > I feel like im grossly overpaid for what I do in
| comparison to the much more impactful work that they did,
| making roughly half what I do
|
| This this this. I'm a former blue collar who managed to
| break into tech. After a decade I _still_ feel weird
| about the amount that I make. My partner and I now have
| our long-term finances completely squared away and still
| have money "left over" every month. I feel super lucky,
| and I basically just want to spend it on my friends and
| family. They are not destitute but mostly not in tech and
| just don't have the surplus that we have. Finding ways to
| share with them without it being overt and weird is an
| ongoing challenge. (Dinner parties are definitely a
| favorite, since we like cooking anyways.)
| khazhoux wrote:
| > I've been paying for a lot of things for my friends
| recently as there is a very large imbalance in wealth
| between us which is more recent... I still felt sort of
| akward about how I was approaching it... I wanted to let
| them know that I don't care about the money at all,
|
| What kinds of things are you paying for, though? Consider
| there's a subtle, unintentional message if you insist on
| paying for their $20 burger and drink: " _This $20 is a big
| deal to you, but not to me_. " Unless they are dirt poor,
| they can probably pay for themselves for most things.
|
| Myself, I have friends with 10x less money (self-employed),
| and 10x more money (huge stock options and the company
| popped) -- in both cases, we round-robin the check at
| dinner. Now mind you, we're not going to French Laundry...
| ilyt wrote:
| > What kinds of things are you paying for, though?
| Consider there's a subtle, unintentional message if you
| insist on paying for their $20 burger and drink: "This
| $20 is a big deal to you, but not to me." Unless they are
| dirt poor, they can probably pay for themselves for most
| things.
|
| I mean if you are stubborn enough you'd find anything
| innocent to be malicious but I'd wager most people would
| think nothing of it unless you do it every single time
| and also refuse reciprocal offers
| khazhoux wrote:
| The context was if someone suddenly has much more money
| than their friends, and then decides it's their
| responsibility to pay for everything. It's not, and
| probably wouldn't be appreciated.
| [deleted]
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| My friends with 10X less money can't afford to eat out,
| so yeah, I offer to take them out if I want to go out
| with them.
| xapata wrote:
| > Unless they are dirt poor, they can probably pay for
| themselves for most things.
|
| Are you saying $20 for a burger and drink is trivial
| unless one is "dirt poor"? That doesn't match my
| estimates of the distribution of wealth in the US, and
| certainly not the world.
| khazhoux wrote:
| No, it wasn't about the price of a burger. My point was
| that just because you made a million dollars and your
| buddy didn't, don't start treating him like every simple,
| common social expense must be a financial burden for him.
| xapata wrote:
| > every simple, common social expense
|
| I don't think a $20 burger and drink is a simple, common
| social expense for everyone. Certainly not on a frequent
| basis.
| pc86 wrote:
| OK, forget the price of the burger and look at the actual
| point they're making.
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| It is, but a $20 lunch should be considered an occasion
| or treat and not a daily driver. Just because it's not a
| daily driver doesn't make it trivial.
|
| If most people eat lunch out once a week for $20 - that's
| about $1000/yr. That's trivial for most people if it's
| part of their social/entertainment expenses (eg even
| making $30-40k), but it's okay that it might not be
| trivial for all people.
| xapata wrote:
| I don't think spending an extra $1k per year is trivial
| for someone making $40k per year.
| ls-lah_33 wrote:
| Bible time!
|
| When you sit to dine with a ruler, note well what is before
| you,
|
| and put a knife to your throat if you are given to
| gluttony.
|
| Do not crave his delicacies, for that food is deceptive. -
| The Book of Proverbs
|
| In my experience rich people are very 'outcomes focused'.
| They almost always expect something in return. I always ask
| myself why are they giving food to me specifically and not
| just some random person?
| sidfthec wrote:
| > In my experience rich people are very 'outcomes
| focused'. They almost always expect something in return.
|
| That's a pretty sad way to live. I mean, I guess when I'm
| back home and the "rich" person in the room (I went from
| rural america to FAANG salary), I just want people to
| enjoy themselves and not think about price when we're at
| a nice restaurant. That's the "outcome" I want.
|
| Back in the bay area, the rich people in the room never
| seem to want anything in return for their hospitality. At
| most they want to hire me, but there's no expectation
| there.
|
| Your experience (or maybe incorrect thought) is not what
| I've seen.
| krapp wrote:
| >In my experience rich people are very 'outcomes
| focused'. They almost always expect something in return.
| I always ask myself why are they giving food to me
| specifically and not just some random person?
|
| How often do rich people randomly feed you and what is it
| they want in return?
| AH4oFVbPT4f8 wrote:
| "I imagine that for people with newer or less strong
| friendships it must be even harder to manage. "
|
| This is me. I'm at a point where through a series of good
| luck and risk adverse decisions I have a free flow of cash.
| I really enjoy getting the opportunity to spend it on
| others, ill buy coffee, ill buy lunch. I ask for nothing in
| return as it's my honor to do this for them and I want to
| set the example of being generous with nothing desired in
| return. If pressed I say, today I can so allow me to do so.
| In the future when you can, I'll return the honor and let
| you buy then.
|
| I also have a friend who again through a series of good
| decisions is at a good place financially and it's fun for
| us to try and buy things or meals for each other because we
| both know each others finances and the joy it brings being
| able to do this for one another.
| vidarh wrote:
| I think if it's long standing friendships there's certainly
| more wiggle room. Even to the point that you ought to just
| be able to tell them to let you know if they feel you're
| being obnoxious about it.
|
| But often it's also not even amounts, as long as it's
| reasonably discreet and you create a plausible excuse for
| why you're paying, and there's a sense of back and forth.
| With friends or girlfriends I know earn less, I've usually
| made a point of saying that when _I choose or suggest_
| where to invite someone, I prefer to pay and I 'd
| appreciate if they let me, and if they insist on paying for
| something they can pay for things when they choose the
| venue. There's a tacit "because that lets each of us pick
| somewhere that fits our cost level" in it that remains
| unstated, and the give and take helps make it feel more
| even as long as it's not too blatant and in your face and
| you _never_ make a point of how expensive anything you pick
| is. It also works best if you also pick cheap places
| sometimes.
| telesilla wrote:
| >each of us pick somewhere that fits our cost level
|
| This is the best, most wise answer and will last through
| long friendships.
| treeman79 wrote:
| Make it a "business expense" friends won't feel as bad of
| company is treating them all to dinner.
| larkost wrote:
| I am not sure that this is a net improvement: either you
| are lying to your friends, or you are lying to the
| business/on your taxes.
| ilyt wrote:
| Well if they get sad from getting told "I have some free
| money and I'd rather buy stuff for my friends than
| myself", that's next best thing.
| nuancebydefault wrote:
| Also, some people try to somehow make you feel guilty because
| you have no money problems. Others who have not much to spend
| are very thankful for a small practical gift.
| maxfurman wrote:
| Your friends usually want to feel like they are your social
| peers; casually buying dinner for everyone reminds them that
| you're loaded and they aren't, but if they chip in they can
| maintain that feeling of being on your level. I got a tech job
| in 2014 when all my friends were waiters and bartenders and I
| found myself in situations like this quite a bit. To what
| degree am I obligated to pay more, since I have more, versus
| protecting my friends feelings and not rubbing it in?
|
| Humans are complicated creatures!
| [deleted]
| Swizec wrote:
| > I got a tech job in 2014 when all my friends were waiters
| and bartenders
|
| I sort of have this "problem" with my family. Since moving to
| USA about 8 years ago, I've been able to build as much wealth
| as took my mom her whole life. My sister makes in a month
| what I make in a week.
|
| The balance I've found works best when we hang out is for me
| to take care of any flights or lodgings, the invisible
| expenses, and be on equal footing otherwise. You pay for some
| meals or drinks, I pay for others, it all about balances out.
|
| And sometimes I buy them tech they can't afford or donate my
| old devices. They seem to feel better about receiving a
| device I no longer need than being bought a new one.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Thats actually a great compromise and happy that it is
| working for your family.
|
| I've found a lot of parents have trouble switching from
| being providers to being provided for, especially if some
| of your siblings are still "takers".
|
| Personally my parents insist on us joining them on
| vacations I extremely don't want to go on (Orlando theme
| parks in peak 100F+ summer heat as 40ish couple w/o kids),
| and that they'll cover the expense.. when the expense isn't
| the issue, and 1/10th of what I'd spend on holiday.
| Swizec wrote:
| > vacations I extremely don't want to go on
|
| Why do you think I pay for flights and lodgings? ;)
|
| But really in my family's case flights are expensive and
| quickly add up to a month of their income. It's not that
| they don't want to go somewhere fun, it's that they
| can't. And I'm tired of burning all my vacations on going
| back home. Flying them out somewhere fun is the obvious
| solution.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Yeah that's pretty great. It really depends on the
| people. People just have different tastes, and it's not
| just a cost thing.
|
| Of my parents & in-laws, really only my father in law
| would probably genuinely be able to enjoy going somewhere
| we chose. My mother in law and parents would probably
| actively dislike going..
|
| About 10 years ago I stopped trying with certain things..
|
| My parents anniversary one year we treated them to brunch
| at a place that's like.. not fancy, but wear a polo shirt
| & not sneakers.. but also its NYC so if you don't they
| aren't gonna kick you out anyway. Nothing adventurous
| food wise - chicken, steak, burger, pancakes, fries,
| eggs, whatever you imagine standard fare but done very
| well.
|
| It was clear they weren't enjoying it, and in a
| subsequent anniversary dinner they insisted we all go out
| to the place they chose - fried fish & laminated menus at
| a marina type thing.
| vidarh wrote:
| Flights and hotels are "perfect" for that kind of thing
| because the prices are so extremely variable as well.
| Much easier to "quietly upgrade" the whole experience
| without it getting weird that for a lot of other things.
| birdyrooster wrote:
| The biggest thing is making sure people have choice when
| you are paying. Sometimes it can be that people are paying
| for control.
| abruzzi wrote:
| To me, the subtlety is specifically mentioning money. "I'll
| pick up the check" feel more tacky than "on me". Both
| explicitly imply I'm paying, but the first says I'm paying for
| you, and the other says that I'm doing this for you. I know
| that a hairline difference, but for me it makes is seem less
| explicitly transactional and more like reciprocity.
|
| The second example doesn't seem as bad, becuase the cost of the
| cottage won't go down if you don't show up. But it would be
| softened further if the mention of money were out of the
| picture--"I have a cottage for the weekend" versus "I rented a
| cottage"
|
| This to me goes back to a very old-fashioned prejudice that
| discussion of money is a bit vulgar.
| dxscorp wrote:
| I think you're spot on, the small details in delivery make a
| big difference and people naturally pick up on it
| waboremo wrote:
| That's a good point about the illusionary aspect to it all.
| It's part of why there are so many cultural/social traditions
| where the polite thing to do is to counter-offer. If someone
| wants to pay for a meal, you're _supposed_ to offer to pay
| instead, this dance goes on several rounds until you give up
| allowing the original person to pay, which kind of demonstrates
| several things one of them being loyalty and commitment.
|
| When this happens in cultures without this tradition, I find
| that both parties miss out: it doesn't feel as rewarding to
| pay, and it doesn't feel as rewarding to have your meal paid
| for because it seems low effort. People almost view that as
| bragging vs sharing because of that lack of dance. Which is
| part of the illusion! High effort v low effort.
|
| A safe way to treat people is to allow them the ability to
| "counter-offer". Dance with them a little, alternatively
| encourage them for the next event if they want. You can avoid
| that crude transactional feeling, plus if they are up for it,
| next event is their choice.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| So https://twitter.com/killersundymann/status/144613128396958
| 92... but with money
| ilyt wrote:
| TIL I'm German.
|
| It's just so much less mental effort to be direct.
|
| I've also noticed an opposite is a problem, when you don't
| want something that someone else made (say cookies) many
| people feel personally attacked that I don't want their
| cooking. Bitch I'm fat, I don't need more.
| Aerbil313 wrote:
| I haven't thought of it before, but here in Turkiye that
| dance is everywhere in life. Not only money related
| situations, if anyone is going to take/give anything more
| than the other party, or even if someone will be first to
| something and other party will be second, that dance is
| usually performed. I considered it an unnecessary form of
| kindness until now. But this is fading like any other
| tradition with great speed, as modernity spreads.
| hgsgm wrote:
| This is the Byzantine General problem of relationships. No
| way to know how many times to go around before stopping.
| atoav wrote:
| > For me, I don't get the point of having wealth/resources if I
| can't share them freely. Especially if you come from a more
| modest background and now make 5x what some of your
| friends/family do.
|
| In my experience the most adamant refusers are people who
| literally live paycheck to paycheck. It is a mix of pride and
| the (very real!) fear that you might think they are only
| friends with you because you got the funds.
|
| If anything you should see it as a compliment if people who
| would need it refuse to let you pay.
| ghaff wrote:
| I generally agree with your points, although in the takeout
| case, the host can probably communicate fairly clearly that
| they're going to order takeout (because they don't cook, don't
| want to bother with a caterer, etc.) and if anyone asks what
| they owe wave them off and that's that. Though, of course, if
| they _did_ cook a meal no one would think of paying. (Though
| informal get-togethers with my friends tend to be pot luck to
| at least a degree.)
|
| Of course, financial situations do matter. Some new grads
| scraping by in the expensive city are probably not going to
| operate the same way that generally well-off professionals
| where everyone knows that a group takeout order really isn't a
| big deal for the host.
| hgsgm wrote:
| I once had an amazing meal at someone's house, so I donated
| to food bank in their honor.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| It really depends on the person. Half of friends are like
| whatever. Half will send you a Venmo/zelle for an estimated
| amount if you refuse.
|
| I end up making sure to order modestly with the second half,
| as its not being generous if they are going to reimburse me
| later.
| [deleted]
| petesergeant wrote:
| Dating can be complicated like this. Last time I was single, I
| had quite a bit more money than the people I was dating, and if
| we went for dinner, I wanted to eat at much nicer places than
| they did. The magic solution here was to say simply "I'm going to
| choose the place, but give me $20/$50 towards dinner" and then to
| pay for everything else ... it made stuff so much less weird,
| even if dinner ended up being an order of magnitude more
| expensive.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Same. I'd always just pay for everything though. Much easier.
| snapcaster wrote:
| This was good food for thought, thanks for posting
| EGreg wrote:
| In Capitalism, you are always encouraged to own instead of rent.
| The benefits of private ownership are extolled. Capitalists are
| shocked by "in 2030, you'll own nothing and be happy."
|
| Ownership is an idea that allows companies that build things to
| sell excess capacity and luxury stuff. Like real estate in
| growing economies (China, or the American Dream in past decades
| of USA). Or like carmakers in the USA until recently.
|
| Own that car! Then look how much unused metal is parked on the
| street most of the day, so carmakers can create more. When self-
| driving cars come along, our cities will become more beautiful
| again, with less parking lots and lanes. It's also inefficient in
| more ways than one -- a study in San Francisco found that 30% of
| all traffic is just circling looking for parking:
| https://www.reinventingparking.org/2013/10/is-30-of-traffic-...
|
| Ownership is right to exclude all others from using a resource,
| even if you are not using it. So if I own a bike, no one else who
| needs it can use it, it just sits in the closet, thus more bikes
| are required to be sold to society. With CitiBike, or other bike
| sharing programs, bikes are rented on demand.
|
| So one of the benefits is that you can project wealth and excess,
| and invite your friends to use the thing that no one could be
| using anyway.
|
| The millennials and later generations are fine to rent on demand,
| even including clothes ("rent the runway"). They join clubs like
| SoHo club that let them use facilities on demand when they
| travel. It's a different approach. And there, since it's on-
| demand, there is less waste but also it becomes clear when
| someone is subsidizing someone else.
|
| That said ... now that there is so much capacity built (eg
| commercial and residential real estate) that SOMEONE has to own
| it, we may as well own it collectively (housing cooperatives) and
| schedule use of it (eg cooperative time shares) than the
| exploitative landlord model and airbnb model that raises rents
| sky-high.
|
| Housing cooperatives. Taxi cooperatives. Credit unions. Eliminate
| the shareholder class, and let everyone own the network.
| Socialism online, without violence of the State. Someone should
| build that ;-)
|
| PS: It just requires software to self-organize. And it is far
| better for the environment. Producing one electric car takes a
| lot of fossil fuels, and if they were shared we'd cut down on
| production and have more efficient consumption to recoup the
| costs after 70,000 miles.
|
| PPS: Cooking at home is different from the above, because people
| typically buy food and consume food before it spoils. In fact,
| the post is wrong -- going out to a restaurant is far more
| expensive than the supermarket food. Most societies until the
| 1990s did not afford to eat out all the time but they certainly
| invited people over quite often! House parties also gives a great
| reason to visit each other.
| nashashmi wrote:
| So you have traded capitalism for socialism. Except it's not
| really social if they're is a price attached to it.
|
| What the article says is the price of being hospitable without
| being awkward carries a high price of ownership, or high
| capitalistic cost.
|
| And socialistic systems do not allow for normal hospitality
| initiatives.
| mindslight wrote:
| You're basically describing the exact opposite of my paradigm.
| To me, individual ownership of assets is required for power to
| remain distributed throughout society. Specifically,
| individuals retaining a surplus that can be used on a whim,
| without coordination, is required for personal freedom.
|
| The backlash to " _you 'll own nothing and be happy_" is not
| because people are lamenting that (distributed) capitalism is
| fading away across the board. Rather it's because the quip
| describes the dynamic that is being pushed onto the masses, as
| ownership/control of assets is concentrated into fewer hands
| (late stage centralized capitalism).
|
| > _Ownership is right to exclude all others from using a
| resource, even if you are not using it. So if I own a bike, no
| one else who needs it can use it, it just sits in the closet,
| thus more bikes are required to be sold to society. With
| CitiBike, or other bike sharing programs, bikes are rented on
| demand._
|
| This exclusivity is exactly what allows one to take the
| availability of the bike for granted without wondering if it
| will be available. To use the bike for frivolous reasons for a
| tiny incremental cost. To have the bike customized for your own
| needs, comfort, and performance. To buy in at a lower price (a
| solid used non-electric bike) and then upgrade capabilities
| (ebike) down the line. To be able to continue using it (while
| even reducing its carrying costs by say doing maintenance
| yourself) if you lose your source of income and need to save
| money. To loan to a friend ride while you ride your other bike,
| encouraging them to try biking without the hurdle of them
| needing to spend money (per the article). To know that the
| price of using the bike isn't going to gradually creep up
| because someone else wants higher margins, or that you might be
| outright banned due to an unaccountable fickle "algorithm".
|
| Financially - lets say an ebike is $1500 and lasts two years.
| If I'm reading the Citibike prices correctly, a yearly
| membership is $205 and then it's still $0.17/minute to ride? So
| breakeven is around 54 hours a year, which is only one to three
| trips per week?! And in actuality, at the end of two years the
| maintenance on the self owned bike will likely cost less than
| another yearly membership fee.
|
| I'm certainly not disputing that there are advantages to the
| rental model for many types of use (which is why they're
| popular in cities to begin with). But you are ignoring all of
| the benefits of asset ownership.
|
| > _The millennials and later generations are fine to rent on
| demand, even including clothes ("rent the runway")._
|
| Is this state of affairs preferred, or is it due to them being
| much poorer while making poor long-term financial decisions
| that have been advertised to them (lucrative for the
| counterparty) ?
|
| > _They join clubs like SoHo club that let them use facilities
| on demand when they travel._
|
| Routine travel is the domain of the young and rich, spending
| extra resources. The longstanding name for shared temporary
| housing is "hotels". Most everyone still aims to have a primary
| residence - being short on housing a terrible long-term idea as
| government policy has guaranteed it inflates.
|
| > _Eliminate the shareholder class, and let everyone own the
| network. Socialism online, without violence of the State_
|
| You're ignoring that there is still necessarily a controlling
| class - eliminating management/agency is impossible. In any
| social structure, regardless of how you try to mitigate it,
| some people will be more powerful than others. For the most
| part people want to extract themselves from dealing with
| bureaucracy, not sign up for more.
|
| So sure, advocate for replacing shareholders with cooperatives!
| But stop thinking it's a good idea to introduce the centralized
| ownership dynamic where it's not needed in the first place.
| EGreg wrote:
| I appreciate your answer and I don't know why it was
| flagged/killed for a while
| hnbad wrote:
| You're spot-on about the cost of the restaurant vs the dinner
| but I think it's also worth pointing out that being invited to
| be wined and dined _at home_ still feels awkward because it 's
| usually expected that you bring in _something_ (a gift if it 's
| a special occasion or food if it's a potluck).
|
| Additionally staying with them at their vacation home might
| feel less awkard than staying at their home because at their
| home you know they'll have to clean up after you whereas at the
| vacation home there's usually a cleaning fee included in what
| they already paid for.
|
| I guess having a maid might cancel that out but at least where
| I live "I have a maid on call" money is more than "I can afford
| sometimes renting a vacation home with a spare bedroom for a
| trip".
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| The only people who join Soho House are absolutely insufferable
| tryhards.
|
| Also, virtually nobody I know from the millennial or zoomer
| generation actually enjoy renting - ownership is simply out of
| reach.
| ghaff wrote:
| Renting things is fine depending upon the circumstances. It
| depends if you can rent the thing you want, how inconvenient
| the rental transactions are, how frequently you'll use thing
| or for how long, how the economics pencil out, etc.
|
| There are a ton of things I have to or prefer to own. And
| other things I prefer to rent when I need them and/or can't
| economically own.
| bastawhiz wrote:
| I love everything Bill writes. One of the things that I very much
| miss about working at Stripe is getting to read the very
| thoughtful notes that he would send out.
| JohnFen wrote:
| > To me this feels... tacky? Like I feel obligated to at least
| offer to cover part of the check right?
|
| What's tacky about that? Why feel the obligation? These are your
| friends, right?
|
| Although perhaps different sets of friends have different social
| mores.
|
| In my group, doing things like that isn't rare, although more
| commonly the offer to pick up the check isn't part of the invite,
| but is just done when the check comes. Nobody feels strange about
| it because (like "lending" money to each other), everyone does
| things like this occasionally and averaged over the years, we
| pretty much all break even anyway.
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| This is definitely the preferable, and normal, approach, but it
| raises issues when your friend group is of varying
| socioeconomic situations. Less affluent members may deprive
| themselves at dinner, or worse, politely decline the invitation
| all together, because of concern about their ability to pay,
| despite the more affluent members being more than happy to
| cover their meal because they enjoy their company.
| JohnFen wrote:
| My group of friends definitely aren't all of the same
| economic status. I can see how that might be an issue for
| some. In our case, it's really not. Perhaps because we've
| been friends for decades, and at various times we've all been
| flat broke or flush, so no single person is considered the
| "rich" one or the "poor" one. We just don't think in that
| way.
|
| However, friends who don't have as much disposable income
| still "chip in" in different ways. Holding the occasional
| dinner party, providing things in their specialty (carpentry,
| home repair, etc.)
|
| This is why nobody cares or keeps track. Everyone
| participates in one way or another. It all evens out in the
| wash.
| _pastel wrote:
| Some ways to make recipients feel more comfortable:
|
| - You can suggest some other contribution. "Would you mind
| bringing snacks? / Would you mind handling music on the drive? /
| Would you mind giving X a ride?"
|
| - You can allow them to reciprocate in less expensive situations,
| like taking the check when you are at a cheaper place.
| [deleted]
| santoshalper wrote:
| Yeah. Appreciate the hypothesis, but I'm not buying those
| examples. "Hey I rented a house for the weekend, wanna come party
| with me on the beach" isn't awkward at all. Asking how much you
| paid for it would be super weird though.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _" Hey I rented a house for the weekend, wanna come party
| with me on the beach" isn't awkward at all_
|
| Agreed. I feel like the proper thing (read: what I personally
| would do) is to find a way to contribute to the excursion
| (food? booze? party games?), but there's no obligation, and I
| wouldn't expect it if the tables were turned.
| 12907835202 wrote:
| What's most awkward about this for me is the framing. Surely
| you have to ask if people are free or if they want to come to a
| beach house BEFORE you book.
|
| But maybe the point is you'd use it anyway if they didn't want
| to come?
|
| But then if they said "oh we'd rather just go down to the
| local" I'd rather than do that and it would be weird cos they'd
| say, didn't you book a beach house?
| Aeolun wrote:
| Hmm, I kinda feel like me directly paying for friends (or telling
| them I'll pay) sets up an unhealthy expectation.
|
| On one hand I want to do things with people (even if they can't
| pay themselves), on the other hand, I don't want them to come to
| me and expect me to pay.
| virtualritz wrote:
| I don't understand this. I never had this problem.
|
| When you invite people for dinner, it's assumed you cook (and
| this pay for the food) anywhere I lived.
|
| Europe, India, Asia that is.
|
| Drinks are also assumed to be on the host but most people will
| bring a bottle if they want to drink alcohol.
|
| But that's still no expected from the host unless explicitly
| verbalized with the invitation.
|
| When I invite eight people, each of them (or each couple) don't
| don't know how many we will be all together.
|
| When I shout people at a restaurant, I just secretly pay when I
| come back from the bathroom, after desserts have been ordered.
| dnh44 wrote:
| As far as I can tell in the latin part of Europe I think it's
| well understood that if you invite people to a restaurant for
| dinner it means that you will be paying (especially if the word
| invite is used).
|
| In the UK it depends on the background of people, and language
| would also make a difference.
|
| "Do you all want to grab some dinner" is different to "I'd like
| to invite you all out to dinner"
|
| >But that's still no expected from the host unless explicitly
| verbalized with the invitation.
|
| In Europe there would definitely be an expectation that alcohol
| would be provided (although perhaps not all of the alcohol
| depending on various factors). It would also be expected that
| guests bring a bottle of wine or flowers or something to that
| effect. That small gift should be separate to any alcohol
| brought for the purposes of consumption on the evening.
| ilyt wrote:
| I dunno if I'd generalize it to "Europe". Here (Poland), at
| least with my parents generation there is really no such
| expectation, the "giving back" is just inviting them on a
| different occasion. Bringing anything extra of course happens
| but it was strictly optional and often just "look at what
| tasty stuff I made', like a bottle of home-made alcohol or
| some smoked ham.
|
| On some occasion like christmas it was often coordinated
| beforeand, like we all go to christmas to a certain relative
| but everyone was bringing some specific christmas dish, as to
| avoid any duplicates.
| xrd wrote:
| I kept expecting that he would mention Clarence Thomas at some
| point but he never did.
| ipsin wrote:
| Same, the thoughts seems at least inspired by those events. The
| same insight could be labeled "How to bribe someone by making
| it seem like friendship."
| jameshart wrote:
| I think the author might be making the assumption that 'if
| you don't feel awkward receiving the gift, it can't be
| bribery' - which I don't think is what the law says, and
| hardly seems like a sound moral standard either.
|
| I suppose the idea is 'if you don't feel awkward, then there
| can't be any sense of obligation, so no _quid_ pro the _quo_
| '.
|
| But of course that's not true.
|
| Although I suppose the author only said this makes it _look_
| like it's not a bribe. Presumably it might still actually be
| one.
| klyrs wrote:
| Honestly, it looks like the whole court is crooked at this
| point. It's up to Congress to keep them in line, and it's up to
| them to keep Congress in line, but big money runs politics and
| they're all on the take.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| What have the other Justices done to deserve the label of
| crooked? Or as crooked as Thomas?
| klyrs wrote:
| I wouldn't necessarily say they're all equally crooked, but
| the unanimous decision in McDonnell vs United States is
| particularly malodorous. Even my hero RBG accepted gifts
| that should have been declined.
|
| https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023/04/26/u-s-supreme-
| court-...
| motohagiography wrote:
| This is pet issue of mine, as I am often a guest and have rarely
| had the means to reciprocate the hospitality I have been offered.
| Even times when I did have something that was mine to share, the
| percieved power imbalance in sharing it was sometimes odd in the
| relationship.
|
| However, I almost always accept hospitality because I know what a
| pleasure it is to give it, and I never feel like I owe someone
| anything as a result, as it would be a huge insult to them to
| interpret their generosity as having strings. As I have become
| older, I've also learned to be a bit suspicious of people who
| don't accept hospitality or insist weirdly on splitting down to
| the cent because it is a good indicator they are reserving some
| moral license to betray or otherwise screw you later. I've heard
| them say it's a matter of being equal, yet they haven't
| considered that in rejecting my goodwill they have admitted that
| they have wasted my time.
|
| Picking up a tab is not settling debts either, that's taking an
| opportunity to add some value to the time you spend together. I
| know the feeling of the chips being down all too well, and
| interpeting someones generosity as pity, but that's the sting of
| pride, and it deprives people who actually like you of the
| enjoyment of being able to be some relief.
|
| The best way I have seen money spent on others is, "this thing is
| happening, it's already settled and done and everything is taken
| care of, we just need good company to be able to enjoy it, if you
| are able, you should really join us, there are no costs except
| getting there and maybe some drinks." I think that approach works
| all the way from concerts to holidays.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| >As I have become older, I've also learned to be a bit
| suspicious of people who don't accept hospitality or insist
| weirdly on splitting down to the cent because it is a good
| indicator they are reserving some moral license to betray or
| otherwise screw you later.
|
| This is a matter of background. In typical cliche style, I
| "grew up poor". Liverpool has some extremely poor areas. People
| try to have some dignity and don't like to accept what they
| feel is charity, and any generosity is usually seen as a
| gesture of trust and warmth by the person giving it.
|
| E.g., someone "buys a round" of drinks for everyone in your
| group, then someone else buys the next round, then the next
| etc, but if you don't buy a round then you're considered rude.
| My problem is that I never _liked_ to drink quickly, thus it
| could sometimes be misinterpreted as rude or negative.
|
| Is it logical? No, not really, it's a cultural thing. Growing
| up poor, my family and friends had the sentiment that your own
| problems are your own problems and not anybody else's burden to
| carry.
|
| I also hate getting birthday presents because I feel like
| someone felt obligated to give in to societal expectation,
| probably over-spent on something I probably won't like and
| spent too much time on picking it out.
|
| Equally, I'm the guy that'd give you the shirt off his own back
| if it'd make you happy, and like to spoil others, but again, a
| lot of people grew up poor, I have made family and friends feel
| very uncomfortable at times by singling them out for special
| treatment.
|
| That sentiment about people giving your their last penny or the
| shirt off their own back rings true for a lot of folks around
| here. Nobody _wants_ to accept it though!
|
| Social etiquette is a fucking complex tapdance, and with
| autism, I find it even harder lol.
| buggythebug wrote:
| I have a friend that could buy everyone in the room a ferrari and
| still have enough money left to over to buy everyone of their
| friends a ferrari. He has never paid for food or drinks once.
| This guide is not for everyone.
| cj wrote:
| Do people expect him to?
|
| I'm in the process of selling my company and these weird
| dynamics are things that make me nervous.
|
| Edit: in response to the negative comments and downvotes, of
| course I want to share the wealth. The problem is a lot of
| people (or at least a lot of my friends) don't like to feel
| like they can't stand on their own. Offering to pay for
| everything all the time is a turn off for a lot of people (on
| the receiving end).
| colanderman wrote:
| There's a balance between showing your friends you appreciate
| them, and flaunting wealth / buying friendship.
|
| The general rule I think is: don't gift something a friend
| can't repay with equal social value in their own way.
|
| Or if you're going to anyway, make it explicit you're doing
| it for the experience, and don't make it a regular thing.
| (E.g. dinner at a very expensive restaurant you want to
| experience and you don't want to eat alone.) People know that
| rich people do rich people things, and "fun experience" is
| something that can be repaid without spending lots of money.
| e_i_pi_2 wrote:
| I don't think there should be a social pressure but I'd hope
| there would be some internal moral pressure. If I knew I had
| 10x the wealth of someone else I would feel bad not paying
| for things when we're together, like bringing a a younger
| sibling out to get food when they're in school and you have a
| job - they might have some savings but each dollar is worth
| so much more to them.
|
| When there's a need I think in general whoever is best able
| to handle the situation should be expected to do so. This
| example is a bit extreme though because it's talking about
| nice gifts. If someone in the friend group had a car break
| down and couldn't afford a new one I would definitely think
| less of this person for not offering to help when they so
| easily could.
|
| Not completely related - but this reminds me about things
| like parking tickets which disproportionately impact people
| with less money. If they're meant to be a deterrent then the
| fine should be some proportion of income, the $50 fine for
| one person needs to be a $50k fine for someone else to have
| the same level of impact.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _Do people expect him to?_
|
| Imagine not wanting to share trivial amounts of your wealth
| with your friends.
|
| They are friends...right?
| moduspol wrote:
| People can absolutely see this as flaunting wealth. It's
| really not that straightforward.
| carimura wrote:
| wealth is all relative.
| kramerger wrote:
| How do you think he got that rich?
| Silverback_VII wrote:
| Generosity is an aspect of success and wealth, as it
| increases the likelihood of building a strong network of
| people willing to help you achieve your ambitions.
|
| People tend to nurture plants that give something back,
| enriching their own lives in one way or another. Generosity
| shows others that you are such a plant.
|
| Understanding the importance of having a good network may be
| key to know whether a wealthy individual is generous or not.
| I believe that a wealthy entrepreneur is more likely to be
| generous than a wealthy engineer.
| hnbad wrote:
| I think it's worth understanding that this "genorisity" is
| strategic, not universal. People don't get rich by hiring
| employees and paying them most of the money they bring in,
| or by tipping every cleaning lady or splurging on their
| friends, or ... .
|
| I think the important phrase in what you said is "network".
| You want to be generous to those _in_ the network and those
| you want to bring into it. You want to be frugal when it
| comes to everyone else. It 's worth it to pay for a fancy
| business dinner with someone you think might have strategic
| value for you (either directly or as a gateway), not so
| much with your friend from highschool who's in a dead end
| job, has no useful qualifications and has no meaningful
| connections that would even hypothetically be useful.
|
| Of cours some might say this is less generosity than
| sociopathy. Some might say they're right.
| Silverback_VII wrote:
| If you are generous with your friend from highschool who
| has a dead-end job and no useful qualifications, he may
| still be able to help you in one way or another. For
| example, he may have a very inspiring mindset and
| encourage you in your endeavors. He may even be more
| helpful than the not so generous rich guy who doesn't
| share anything with you or the guy who always calculates
| if his investments are worth it.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Be careful with expectations though. "If I help my
| friend, he'll help me in turn" is magical thinking. There
| is no such deal in place. Ungratefulness is _very_
| common.
| guardiangod wrote:
| Small meals, sure, but I wouldn't want him to buy me a full
| meal unless it's a special occasion. I can afford my own meal,
| thank you.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| I suppose when one's that rich they want friends who like them
| for themselves not for the gifts they distribute.
| bawolff wrote:
| Makes sense. If you are spending money, people want to split the
| cost. If you are sharing something you already have and would
| have regardless, even if it costed money originally, no need to
| split costs.
| bippingchip wrote:
| The article overlooks a fundamental side of the social contract
| that is at least equally, if not more, important: how much time
| and effort (not money) do personally invest to spend time with
| your friends.
|
| In my view, it's only awkward when the money side of things is
| not aligned with the personal investment.
|
| That dinner example from the article actually shows this: I buy
| you all Olive garden dinner, or: I take the time to invite you to
| my home, spend some time clean the house think on what to by and
| prepare, what music to play, maybe a movie to watch after etc. in
| order to have a good time together. This is a much more
| thoughtful and mutually beneficial form of investment in
| friendship than just throwing money at it.
|
| Another example could be: Hey, I bought a new board game (or PS5
| or something else), wanna come over and play? You might have
| spent quite some money, but the goal is to be able to invest in
| spending time with your friends.
|
| The moment that is (or is perceived to be) your main intent, most
| folks would have a hard time looking at this as bribery.
| ilyt wrote:
| > That dinner example from the article actually shows this: I
| buy you all Olive garden dinner, or: I take the time to invite
| you to my home, spend some time clean the house think on what
| to by and prepare, what music to play, maybe a movie to watch
| after etc. in order to have a good time together. This is a
| much more thoughtful and mutually beneficial form of investment
| in friendship than just throwing money at it.
|
| Sooo the solution is to make a party at your house but hire a
| cleaner and catering :D
| carimura wrote:
| ya exactly. For my close friends who I've known for decades and
| still hang out with, none of that seems weird (except the Olive
| Garden part).
| vorpalhex wrote:
| I struggled with the restaurant example for this reason.
|
| I take an invite to a restaurant as an invite to hang out and
| socialize. My friend is telling me they want to spend time
| together and don't want to cook. I don't feel awkward about
| this at all.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I would much rather my friends invite me to spend time
| together while cooking rather than go to a restaurant. For
| one, the mean will be guaranteed to be delicious and more
| healthy than the restaurant. Two, it is cheaper. Three, we
| get to do an activity together as opposed to sit around.
| Four, at least one person does not have to travel.
|
| I could go on, and restaurants are okay and all, but I prefer
| them for casual acquaintances. With the closest friends, I
| would hands down pick cooking (assuming eating together is
| all we are doing).
| reaperducer wrote:
| _how much time and effort (not money) do personally invest to
| spend time with your friends._
|
| Exactly. If you're worried about the money, then you're not
| friends, you're acquaintances.
| klntsky wrote:
| > when you consider the value of your friend's time, plus the
| amortized cost of cookware, appliances, furniture, and housing--
| the home meal could be more expensive than the restaurant meal.
|
| For someone who cooks only at parties, sure.
| [deleted]
| ZoomZoomZoom wrote:
| It's really easy. If you directly spend more than your friend
| could ever afford to take from their disposable income if you
| switched places and while being overly emotional/drunk/etc.,
| you're taking on the risk of hurting their dignity.
|
| Taking your friend for a ride in your expensive car should be
| fine, giving them the keys for a week is absolutely not.
|
| If you _really_ want to lash out, like @ilyt said, make it
| invisible: spend on preparations or takedown, maybe arrange a
| little happy accident, or just spend normally and donate the rest
| to your friend 's cause of choice.
|
| First world problem, if I ever saw one.
|
| Now, talking about power dynamics, meaning of work and success
| for interpersonal relationship, it's a whole another level of
| complexity that's important, but it's not just about the money.
| greybox wrote:
| The resteraunt one maybe has some weight behind it, but I fail to
| see how this is awkward: "I rented a vacation home on the cape
| for the weekend, wanna come hang out on the beach?"
|
| In fact, a friend of mine invited me to do the same thing at
| Christmas time this year, and it didn't feel awkward at all!
|
| Maybe this is more of an American culture point?
| sdfghswe wrote:
| > It's not merely a matter of expense; when you consider the
| value of your friend's time, plus the amortized cost of cookware,
| appliances, furniture, and housing--the home meal could be more
| expensive than the restaurant meal.
|
| No it couldn't, this is complete bullshit. The amortization from
| a one time on something that you use every day for many years use
| is nothing.
|
| This person sounds like he never actually cooks. That's all I'm
| saying.
| michaelt wrote:
| I agree it's inconceivable that the _incremental_ cost of
| cooking a meal couldn 't possibly exceed the price of a
| restaurant meal.
|
| Presumably the author is thinking of the kind of people who buy
| a bigger home to have space for entertaining, and/or upgrade
| their home to impress their guests.
|
| If you brought a bigger house to have a dining room for guests?
| Or brought a house with a bigger kitchen and more storage
| space, to store your vast collection of glasses and chairs that
| usually go unused? If you don't have guests often, that might
| not be very cost-effective.
| [deleted]
| fiftyfifty wrote:
| Just have some kids! My adult children are always happy to let us
| spend money on them. Come to think of it, my wife and I still let
| our parents pay for stuff as well, even though they really don't
| need to anymore.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| One option is to say something like "When (you get a 6 figure
| job, your options vest, ...), you can return the favor or pay it
| forward". Two birds with one stone: express confidence in the
| person and make it feel less awkward.
| segfaltnh wrote:
| It seems to me like you hang around with a lot of people with
| similar opportunities and skills than you. Some of my friends
| work at Starbucks. Some of my family is retired after 50 years
| in a factory making $40k/yr while raising 3 kids. They aren't
| just about to have a big break that puts us on even footing.
| colanderman wrote:
| Maybe it's the way that's worded, but that feels even more
| awkward / borderline cringey to me.
|
| A lot of people (arguably wrongly) tie their self worth to
| their wealth. This can come off as "when you're worth as much
| as a human as I am!"
|
| Or, for someone in a career where 6 figures _do not happen_ ,
| this is equivalent to telling them that nope, they can never
| repay this favor!
|
| The only time I could see this working is if you had some
| celebration-worthy _achievement_ which also had money
| associated with it. Then, throw a party to celebrate your
| _achievement_ (say, the company you started went public) --
| friends like to support those! -- and then it 's socially
| acceptable that you're using the money from said achievement to
| fund the party.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| > this is equivalent to telling them that nope, they can
| never repay this favor!
|
| But that's exactly what you want. You're trying to spend
| money on friends without making them feel obligated to spend
| money on you.
|
| Perhaps there's better wording (and I'd like to hear it), but
| I think the best approach is rather than telling them that
| they have no obligation to return the favor, shift the
| obligation to something much less onerous for them by
| shifting it in time or in kind.
|
| A good friend will believe you when you tell them there is no
| obligation to return the favor, but a more casual friend is
| less likely to believe you and more likely to think you're
| shifting the social obligation balance in your favor and
| might call on it in the future. Better to make it explicit to
| head that off.
| colanderman wrote:
| They _will_ feel obligated to repay you, at least socially.
| Framing it explicitly in terms of monetary success -- or
| moreso, something _you_ have that they _don 't_ -- I feel
| adds unnecessary value judgement.
|
| Instead, suggest something they could do _today_ which is
| of equal social cost to them and equal social benefit to
| you. Say -- if you paid for an expensive weekend vacation
| home, maybe next year they can host you at their Uncle
| Whoosit 's place up in rural Maine.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| And now you're obligated to visit Uncle Whoosit or be
| shown up as a hypocrite.
|
| When people say that they want to spend money on friends
| & family with no obligation in return, they're network
| building. That they'd expect the favor to be returned if
| the situation were reversed. Even if nobody really
| expects the situation to be reversed. I guess we could
| lean into that:
|
| "When the zombie apocalypse happens, I expect you to have
| my back".
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| That sounds even wierder.
| inkcapmushroom wrote:
| Yeah I'll tell my parent/brother/friend who works at a grocery
| store that they can pay me back when their options vest, or
| their deli job hits 6 figures...
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Do they want to be in the deli job forever? If no, you're
| probably already helping / encouraging them on their journey
| to get a better job, and that shouldn't be awkward.
|
| If they do want to be in the deli job forever, then yah, my
| phrasing is awkward. There aren't too many people who want to
| work the deli forever, but there are some.
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Being a founder isn't for a majority either. It's nice to
| day-dream about, doing it is another thing altogether.
| rolisz wrote:
| I moved from Romania to Switzerland after college. When I'd
| meet up with old friends in Romania, some of them would joke
| "I'll get the bill now, you can get it when I visit you in
| Switzerland" (costs in Switzerland are much higher than in
| Romania)
| actionfromafar wrote:
| That may or may not work. It can come off as condescending, or
| not as bad, but still annoying, disconnected from reality.
| acapybara wrote:
| That's very diplomatic and nice of you to say.
|
| But what he said is straight-up a terrible idea.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| It depends on the situation. Often times "pay it forward" by
| itself is the better approach, but it also imposes an
| obligation...
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Having the ability to shower friends and family with gifts - and
| doing so - is a fundamental requirement for social status in
| every human society. The king who invites all the nobles to a
| great feast, the Hollywood socialite who hosts the most splendid
| post-Oscar party, the Pacific Northwest tribal chieftan who has
| the largest potlatch celebration, are all acting out this
| tradition. The latter may be less familiar:
|
| > "A potlatch involves giving away or destroying wealth or
| valuable items in order to demonstrate a leader's wealth and
| power. Potlatches are also focused on the reaffirmation of
| family, clan, and international connections, and the human
| connection with the supernatural world. Potlatch also serves as a
| strict resource management regime, where coastal peoples discuss,
| negotiate, and affirm rights to and uses of specific territories
| and resources. (wiki)"
|
| Distribution of resources within societies has historically
| varied quite a bit, so in the more egalitarian societies, the
| situation is more reciprocal, with people giving as many gifts as
| they receieve on average. Highly unequal societies end up with
| 'noblesse oblige' behavior as gifts tend to flow from the wealthy
| to the poor, which has been used as a justification for the
| aristocrat/serf system of feudalism.
|
| These patterns of behavior are a kind of societal glue, and when
| they break down it tends to lead to revolutions and overthrow of
| the social order, as in late 18th century France, early 20th
| century Russia, etc. This probably also accounts for some of the
| failures of authoritarian state communism, as all resources end
| up controlled by state authorities (e.g. it's probably hard to
| throw a private party for friends in North Korea).
|
| In terms of day-to-day living in democratic capitalist societies,
| people instinctively understand this dynamic and much of the
| awkwardness this article discusses relates to the fact that
| people are always keeping account of who gives what to who, even
| if it's just unconscious behavior. It also explains why inter-
| class friendships can be much more difficult to maintain than any
| other type, i.e. inter-faith, inter-race, etc.
| beebeepka wrote:
| Now, I made a little money, good But I still want to live in the
| hood But buying new fly shit Is just like inviting ants to a
| picnic There's just too many sets And now I'm getting those
| kidnap threats
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| rich people problems
| taubek wrote:
| I also guess one has to take cultural differences into account.
| In some cultures one will get offended if you pick up a tab, in
| others it is expected to split the bill. Am I right?
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| You are correct. I have personally offended a guest from Italy
| when I recently sprung to pay the bill before he got his card
| out. I thought it would be like a funny "ha ha - I got it" sort
| of moment, but instead it turned just a bit sour. Turned out he
| had his mind set on it as a way to express his gratitude, and
| me interrupting was kind of like taking that away from him.
| Well, I had my mind set on something similar, so we sort of had
| our wires crossed.
| joseda-hg wrote:
| Yes, and even the way you split bills may be different,
| depending on the country you may foot the entire bill with the
| understanding that the other person will do the same the next
| time, or literally just pay your half (Or just what you
| ordered, but that may be considered skimpy in some circles)
| Freire_Herval wrote:
| Friend offered me 10 billion dollars of cash in several suit
| cases. Felt awkward so I didn't accept.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| > > I'm taking you and 12 friends out to dinner at Olive Garden.
| I'm paying the check. Wanna come?
|
| > To me this feels... tacky? Like I feel obligated to at least
| offer to cover part of the check right?
|
| Maybe it was growing up poor but... Nope. If you want to do
| something nice for your friends then great. I'm glad I'm your
| friend.
| [deleted]
| wnolens wrote:
| I've had to accept that I cannot spend as much money on my
| friends/family as I'm willing or able to.
|
| It's really made me reconsider the value of money. If I can buy a
| house in the city or in a desirable neighborhood, but none of my
| friends/family can then having money/using it in that way is
| isolating.
|
| And I've arrived at identical solutions - cooking instead of
| picking up the tab, sharing apartment rentals that I was going to
| rent anyway.
|
| Additionally: When someone gets married or has a child it's
| acceptable to give a larger gift.
| flamebreath447 wrote:
| It might not be a popular opinion but all the comments about
| cultural differences, or needing to be careful with communication
| seem wrong to me.
|
| Someone offering you a gift to pay shouldn't come off as rude or
| a power play of wealth. It shouldn't be a surprise to you that
| some people are more well off. If a kind gesture makes you feel
| awkward, guilty or lesser that's insecurity on you, not them.
|
| Maybe, just maybe, you are bad at receiving gifts.
|
| Let's be charitable and stop assuming people are doing something
| weird. Yes we can communicate better but we don't need to walk on
| eggshells just to be kind to friends.
|
| I absolutely love treating friends. I intentionally invite people
| to dinner, don't tell them ahead of time that I'm paying so they
| order exactly what they would have normally. I excuse myself to
| the restroom and ask the waiter to use my card at the end.
|
| The few times I've had people had an issue or feel bad, I was
| extremely clear with them that
|
| 1. I want to, it brings me joy to give my friends gifts 2. I do
| not expect anything in return, I just wanted to spend time and
| enjoy a dinner with them 3. I purposely budget to do this, it's
| the same as me inviting them over for cooked dinner 4. If they
| are deeply hurt or bothered by it I have no problem with them
| paying the portion and won't do it again if it wasn't something
| that made them feel cared for or enjoyed
|
| I've never had anyone ever come back to point (4)
| stcroixx wrote:
| To me, it's respectful to offer the intended recipients of your
| gift the choice to accept or not rather than forcing something
| on them they didn't consent to.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| The good thing about consent in this case is they can just
| "return" the gift by paying you their portion of the bill,
| and if they don't consent isn't really violated. You went
| from owing the restaurant to owing them.
|
| But why take the joys of life and make them difficult? Let
| your friend enjoy himself by being generous.
| stcroixx wrote:
| While this behavior is joyous and enjoyablefor you, not
| everyone may share your point of view. Some find joy in
| paying their own way. Let others choose for themselves
| instead of deciding for them.
| sneak wrote:
| Paying a bill isn't forcing anything on anyone. It literally
| doesn't involve them, it's between the payer (the gift giver)
| and the payee (the restaurant).
| stcroixx wrote:
| If you pay someone else's debt without their consent it
| absolutely involves them. Of course the restaurant doesn't
| care who pays.
| sneak wrote:
| How could it possibly? They aren't a party to the
| transaction.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| They are. Picking up someone's tab is analogous to
| extending them credit. There are people out there who
| hate being indebted to anyone.
| Jedd wrote:
| > Subscribe to my private email list to read articles that were
| too sensitive to share online.
|
| In an article discussing the nuance of language, and leveraging
| power imbalances for fun and profit, that's a nice way to sign
| off.
|
| Anyway, my first _proper_ introduction to really deeply
| considered word selection was during the 90 's BBS era when
| someone organising a social event -- that was necessarily
| targeted at a bunch of (probably) socially inept people, myself
| included -- explained to me that they avoided any conventional
| phrasing like 'come and join us' as it instantly implied there's
| an 'us' that _they_ weren 't already a part of.
|
| Such a small observation at the time, but had a big impact.
| Hugsun wrote:
| I highly recommend the book Debt: The First 5000 Years for anyone
| that finds these things interesting. It is full of similar
| anecdotes from around the world and throughout history.
|
| In some cultures, settling all debts with a friend is akin to
| declaring the friendship over. As owing or being owed something
| is a type of bond which is broken when nothing is owed. Breaking
| the bond implies that you want to break all ties with the person
| as both are free to walk away. They often manage this by taking
| turns borrowing small items while making sure that there is
| always an imbalance.
|
| Regarding the OP, there are so many norms and expectations
| regarding money and they are so varied around the world. My way
| of dealing with uncertainties like this is just to talk about
| them in an impartial way.
| hgsgm wrote:
| > In some cultures, settling all debts with a friend is akin to
| declaring the friendship over.
|
| This is also how you terminate employment.
| ilyt wrote:
| I have that thing when I'm absolutely fine with some friend
| owing me something but cannot tolerate otherwise and it bothers
| me to no end.
| zokier wrote:
| Isn't the article ignoring marginal vs fixed cost? Adding extra
| plate to dinner table or having extra guest in a cottage has
| small marginal cost vs having additional guest in restaurant or
| renting one room larger vacation home.
| swe_dima wrote:
| I am in love with travelling, and one of my dreams is travelling
| with friends.
|
| But my friends, not being from a 1st world country or having a
| high paying job, can't afford that.
|
| I have tried on several occasions offering to pay for the trip,
| but unfortunately, like the article says, most people don't feel
| comfortable if you do that.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-28 23:01 UTC)