It is when your standard for "rich" is framed in terms of "can afford to buy good boots".

Which is not the definition implied by the original quote so great. We agree.

What are you even talking about? This is literally called "boots theory" and is explicitly giving boots as an example. That's what "framing in terms of" means.

If you read the discussion, the quote responded to included the claim

> The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

Which is a dumb claim. As you’ll note, I said that the general effect was true but this claim was wrong.

You appear to be arguing something tangential