Okay. Here's how I'm thinking, if it helps anyone. This question has a more so a statistical based answer, to me, than logical.

Analogy: Over the past 25 years, the price of animal food has increased compared to hamster owner salaries. Does this mean that, now, hamster owners are paying a larger portion of their salaries compared to 25 years ago?

• This can be challenged by saying that, now, hamster owner food sales make up a smaller proportion of all animal food sales.

• Because, maybe there are many more dog owners now, buying dog food (which is more expensive than hamster food), thus driving up the avg animal food price.

• So the hamster owners could still be paying the same amount, relative to their income, for hamster food. But when comparing their incomes to avg animal food prices it wrongly assumes that they are ALSO paying more.

• (In this example different animal foods works as different new-cars. Different animal owners work as different types of buyers (ie. individual, business, etc)

Okay, So average prices on new cars are higher, relative to average individual income, compared to 25 years ago. So meaning that 25 years ago, avg income may have been 60k and the car 30K (50% of income). Today a car price is 60K and income is 80k (75% of income).

The issue here is that even if it seems like individuals are paying more for cars... it could just be that something else, like businesses (dog owners), makes up more of the market and are buying more expensive cars (diff food). Thus, raising the avg price. But our individual buyers (hamster owners) are a small portion, who are buying cheaper cars (cheaper animal food).

if this helps anyone!

This is how i'm thinking of it:

• like how we learned before, just because something is sufficient doesn’t mean other things cannot be true

• just like that a condition saying "most electric cars" is not stating that it excludes the possibility of "all electric cars" meeting the environment all.

  • because why would all cars being electric NOT meet environmental goals? that would make so sense.

• context also makes the point of most/all possibly equaling 'all' easier to digest.

My way of remembering:

----

Madame Morrible -> MM

/MM -> anything not Madame Morrible

Thus,

Madame Morrible, MM, flip it around... Wicked Witch