Oh, yes, I couldn’t agree with you more about that last point.
Rich first, virtue later, would surely be considered an abuse by many serious stoics. But it seems to be the interpretation that arises when you’re already (relatively) well off and reading some of the main figures. I don’t think it’s a claim people tend to make formally, but I think it’s very much part of the prevailing, pop-stoic attitude.
As for stoicism being “by the rich,” I see hardly any references to Epictetus or Zeno or the Cynics (or even Cicero) compared to loads about Marcus Aurelius and Seneca. To me it’s clear that the present, informal school is very much tied to the circumstance of wealth.