I think I see what tripped you up in my comment. I said > if it costs me nothing, then the love it represents is nothing. You could read this as meaning that

I think I see what tripped you up in my comment. I said > if it costs me nothing, then the love it represents is nothing. You could read this as meaning that every action has to be super costly or else the love isn't there. I admit that it's poorly phrased and it's not what I meant. What I should have said is that if it costs you nothing, then it doesn't in itself indicate love. It costs me nothing to say "I love you" on its own, and you wouldn't believe me if I just walked up to you in the street and said that. But your mom has spent thousands of hours and liters of blood, sweat and tears caring for you, so when she says "I love you," you have all that to back those words up. It's the cost she paid before that imbues the words with value: high cost, deep love. Hopefully that makes more sense.