This reminds me of that shtick about how you need a firearm when you have a wife and kids. The sheer odds that you deter a home invader and the difference is the firearm is not that high. But what is salient is whether you're doing your share around the house, communicating with your SO, being there for your child, etc. All the super simple boring stuff happens a million times more often and you drop the ball on it in exchange for nothing (home defense isn't nothing, but that's also not the reason you're communicating poorly).

In the same way, what are you saying about moral salience? Is the fucking joker holding these two hostage and you have to choose which one lives? What sort of special relativity of morality do you need to experiencing that they're significantly morally different? Is this an aesthetic and edgy argument about taxes? Is this something about race mixing? Is it actually bad when overexploited people don't die of exposure? If you're dating one of them I hope you hold them in higher regard than the other, but otherwise I hope they have a nice life or whatever. What the fuck are you talking about? Don't hurt either of them, don't abuse either of them, and read a book.