[lrdswrk00]

Yup, so is the original comment.

The meaning of all that “glitters is gold” applied to reality is arbitrary.

I don’t have obligation to recite some historical meaning the author might intend.

I can see Bezos as glittering now but not gold.

I can see accruing fiscal wealth as the same.

The only language with concrete meaning are the outputs of physical science experiment. There is or is not a physical object or force.

Colloquialism are subjective. The when and where to apply a math formula is subjective. Just because one can be defined such that it abides the order of operations of math doesn’t mean it represents reality accurately. Who eats still comes down to political influence.

We can help a lot more people thrive if we socially allowed for less rounding off of who is valuable. But since we prefer to do that; why not round off this community as unimportant? You’re all just as normal as anyone.