[ SECRET POST #2769 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2769 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #396.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: rich vs poor people as friends

[intrigueing]

If you can't have fun with your poor friends doing something that doesn't require money, and if the pleasure of your poor friends' company doesn't make it completely worthwhile to sacrifice doing fun things that require spending money in order to spend time with your friends instead, then you're obviously not really their friend. To you, they're just acquaintances you do things with because doing things alone is boring.

I really wish the word "friend" wasn't such a misused term.

Re: rich vs poor people as friends

[(Anonymous)]

I think it depends on how people on both sides of the equation act. Often when there are financial discrepancies in friendships it all depends on the personalities whether it'll work or not. Someone who can't have fun without spending x amount of dollars isn't likely to be able to hang out with people on tighter budgets, but at the same time, someone on a strict budget who spends all their time complaining about how they wished they were doing x instead when they're doing things that don't cost money can be grating too.

A+

[(Anonymous)]

I was thinking "Yeah, OP, I see what you mean, but somehow this just feels really dickish" but I couldn't put my finger on why. Hanging out with poor people who you just know casually isn't much fun if it stops you from doing stuff you like. But actual friends are a different matter.

If "but they can't go to the movies with me!!!11" is a major consideration in your "friendship", the so-called "friendship" obviously isn't very strong.

Re: rich vs poor people as friends

[a_potato]

You basically nail it.

I don't understand OP or some of the people in this thread at all. My closest friends are the people with whom I can go on walks or sit around and talk. The whole notion that that's somehow "boring" is like...wait, what?

On top of that, there are free parks, and lakes, and mountains, and beaches. Many towns have free music, or free food festivals. You can invite someone over to watch the latest episode of your favorite TV show. You can just invite someone over period. Why must all interactions involve payment and a certain type of activity?

Re: rich vs poor people as friends

[(Anonymous)]

Yep.

I'm the "poor" friend in my group of friends, but no one has an issue with the fact I don't go with them to expensive places.
I usually join for plans that don't involve much money or we meet at someone's house, divide the food expenses evenly and enjoy each other company and do some other stuff.

And guess what? 10 years later we're still good friends, my shitty financial situation doesn't change that.

Re: rich vs poor people as friends

[elaminator]

You make a good point; there are plenty of free or inexpensive things you can do together.

If they can't afford concert tickets, or visiting Disney or an expensive restaurant, there are alternatives.  You could always do those other, more expensive activities with someone else.