One example was "labor costs $20, material costs $20." "ACTUALLY, the material needs to be refined and shipped so it's ALSO affected by labor."

Dude, it's a simplification. One could reasonably assume that the "material" and "labor" costs had been derived with this assumption in mind.

Plus, of course, most laborers aren't on minimum wage and minimum wage increases have a pretty small impact on CEO pay. Hey, if this increase only affects the bottom 1/3 of the workforce at 100%, the next 1/3 at what we'll call 50%, and the next 1/3 at what we'll call 10%, what happens to that "labor costs increasing eats the whole value for the poor minimum wagers" thing?

Of course, these are also people who seem to argue that inflation is actually just a lie perpetuated to justify poor people buying cell phones and running out of money, so I'm not sure they're exactly interested in good faith and intellectual rigour.