Go and read the two sentences in question, and what I said about them. It's completely different to that. #(X or Y) > #(Y-only) vs #(Y or X) > #(X-only) See

Go and read the two sentences in question, and what I said about them. It's completely different to that. #(X or Y) > #(Y-only) vs #(Y or X) > #(X-only) See how these can both be true? (See how meaningless the comparison in either one of those statements actually is? That was the point I was making). It seems to me that people are so ideologically driven in their thinking that they could only see what I was saying as "taking one side, to the exclusion of the other". That is, people treating my statement as like #X > #Y is equivalent to #Y > #X like you did in your millionaires/billionaires attempt at an analogy. Even though if you take the ideological blinkers off it is plainly obvious that I'm not saying anything at all like that. My original comment would be really greyed out if not for also having received a lot of upvotes along with all the downvotes (the points count on it has swung up and down over time).