No, that's not what they are saying. They are saying that the literal reading of the term itself implies that poor people have less of a say than rich people.

▲

altmanaltman 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It would if the saying was "vote with your dollars" or "vote with the dollars in your wallet". A literal reading of the term means you signal your vote/opinion by choosing what to pay for and it can hurt businesses since they have to generate revenue, not that $1 = 1 vote.

▲

Eisenstein 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I disagree. The wallet is a term that can be augmented by 'fat' or 'full' or 'heavy', which means that a wallet can be different sizes. From this you would get that poor people would have thinner wallets and thus less effect on outcomes where money is a factor.

	▲	altmanaltman 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Fair enough, but I would still agree to disagree since I dont think it refers to what's inside the wallet or any other quality about the wallet but just that you should vote by action and boycotts. But i mean, we are splitting hairs over semantics at this point. I could see both interpretations valid but i prefer mine.