I'm just messing. Obviously you are correct in the sense that the smaller the bet in relation to the pot the less equity needed for a call to be profitable. But obviously that can't be all that is factored, as we still need to assess our equity against villain's likely range. Just because the bet is very small in relation to the pot, and thus our equity needed is small, doesn't mean a call is automatically correct. Because we can still not have enough equity. In the instance with OP's hand, he certainly had the 8% equity needed for a call to be breakeven.