Left picture is the whole picture, and in the case of wealth distribution that picture shows extreme inequality from the start, no one does pick a sample to measure that, you just take tax information, sum it all up, no selection necessary, because we can handle numbers in bulk pretty well with a pocket calculator (selection bias? nope). When it comes to my selection of states actually working, that is meant as encouragement, do install a similar voting system, a similar system of checks and balances, redistribution of wealth. But it also serves what is called in a discourse as a rebuttal, or in logic falsification of an argument by example. The same goes for Trump leading a country twice, even though we all know, that he made his money by not paying the contractors hired to construct his buildings. He never payed the full prize, instead he threatened to let the contracting firm go dry by dragging them to court, until they run out of funds. He himself laid bare his character tons of times, and still he was able to establish his own brown shirts (ICE), dragging people out of their houses, violationg the constitution, the very reason, why people are proud to have a state in the first place. Brilliant court system by the way (=sarcasm), that makes fraud look like a good deal and protects a wanna be king. Those are again facts, no need for a comparison of any selection. Selection bias is the most irrelevant term you could use... Critical thinking made me realize that.