> This is a fine example of the abuse of the word "literally" It's not. The problem lies with the way the respondent rephrased the original. The original, as

> This is a fine example of the abuse of the word "literally" It's not. The problem lies with the way the respondent rephrased the original. The original, as written ("very literally ends up with less money"—not to "very literally take money out", as the respondent chose try to use in a bizarre and underhanded setup), is in perfectly reasonable accord with the correct use of the word "literally"...