You asked a question that you answered yourself in the next sentence without my response. This is what you said:
The article talks about how this is not them being assholes, but because if they have more money then their peers, it tends to make them feel isolated and self-conscious and fears about being taken advantage of. They even quote the expert at the end who says “They don’t care about the $4.”
You would ditch a friend for struggling with someone? I find that hard to believe.
So, wait, had you read the article at that point or not? If so, what the fuck did you mean? I'm really confused because you are going off on some other tangent at this point.
To explain, I feel like your position has totally shifted with no admission that something said earlier was wrong, so I'm trying to figure out if I misunderstood or if you are just pretending at this point that you weren't actually arguing what you were. So far, you've dodged it with every post, more and more so trying to make it about me.
Don't blame me for your inability to explain yourself.
Although, when you complained "well you clearly know what I meant better than I did" I should have known this was a warning that it was something you did, or were going to do.
If you actually wanted me to explain myself, you would have done it a long time ago. Whatever I say now doesn't matter, you'll find a way to argue with it.
Again with the hypocrisy that you know what I want better than I do.
But good on you for ignoring the "pointless" exercise of actually defending your claims, in favor of the pointless exercise of just claiming the other person isn't fault for your inability.
Really makes the implicit claim that you are avoiding something "pointless" very strong.