This is absolutely the most baffling thing. You yourself agree with me, you say that nothing I'm saying is wrong, yet because my opinions were formed from observation and discussion rather than direct hands-on experience, they're missing the "magic something" required to make them meaningful?
He's telling you that you can't criticize anything unless you vote for it 100 times first. At 1 vote = $1. Then realize you were wrong for voting that way.
Then you can criticize it.
This is like saying you can't criticize Obama for attacking Civil Rights, Snowden, etc. unless you voted for him.
This is like saying you can't criticize the locked-down stupidity of the iphone unless you first buy one and spend 20 hours using it and trying to figure out how to unlock it.
This is like saying you can't criticize lawyers for filing fake lawsuits unless you have actually been a lawyer and filed fake lawsuits yourself.
This is like saying you can't criticize the cops for beating up an unarmed person laying on the ground unless you have actually been a cop before.