3 ms·

This is an honest question, and I promise, I'm not trolling but have you actually experienced where someone is really uncomfortable because I can go buy somethi

by noahc 15y ago

This is an honest question, and I promise, I'm not trolling but have you actually experienced where someone is really uncomfortable because I can go buy something that is of equal quality and it is related to social status? Is there data on this? Sure there are trends clothing, knife brands, and almost every other good comes in and out fashion, but isn't that the nature of competition and capitalism? Is this because the wealthy don't want to be seen as using the same thing as the unwashed masses? In some ways I want to believe you, but I find it unfathomable.

khafra 15y ago
It's not at all controversial--standard social signaling theory. GMU Econ professor Robin Hanson's blog, http://overcomingbias.com http://overcomingbias.com, has stuff about it all the time. Here's some more classic citations: http://octavia.zoology.washington.edu/handicap/honest_economics_01.html http://octavia.zoology.washington.edu/handicap/honest_econom...
- noahc 15y ago
  I've read through a lot of that it still doesn't make sense to me that someone would be uncomfortable with the unwashed masses getting access to previously unattainable goods. We both agree that certain goods produce a signaling effect. Where I am curious is do the wealthy not like it when the masses get access to good because: A) They don't deserve them. B) We have to find new signaling goods. C) They drive the price of goods higher or lower depending on the supply/demand curve thus manipulating the market for THEIR goods.
  - jlcx 15y ago
    I think "B" might be closest, though I don't know if I would have phrased it that way. If a certain good becomes accessible to more people, it no longer has the same signalling effect, so a replacement good must be found. I don't know if most wealthy people are terribly upset by this, though it might be upsetting to people who spent more than they could afford on a "signaling good" that subsequently became much cheaper.

by noahc 15y ago

khafra 15y ago

It's not at all controversial--standard social signaling theory. GMU Econ professor Robin Hanson's blog, http://overcomingbias.com http://overcomingbias.com, has stuff about it all the time. Here's some more classic citations: http://octavia.zoology.washington.edu/handicap/honest_economics_01.html http://octavia.zoology.washington.edu/handicap/honest_econom...

noahc 15y ago
I've read through a lot of that it still doesn't make sense to me that someone would be uncomfortable with the unwashed masses getting access to previously unattainable goods. We both agree that certain goods produce a signaling effect. Where I am curious is do the wealthy not like it when the masses get access to good because: A) They don't deserve them. B) We have to find new signaling goods. C) They drive the price of goods higher or lower depending on the supply/demand curve thus manipulating the market for THEIR goods.
- jlcx 15y ago
  I think "B" might be closest, though I don't know if I would have phrased it that way. If a certain good becomes accessible to more people, it no longer has the same signalling effect, so a replacement good must be found. I don't know if most wealthy people are terribly upset by this, though it might be upsetting to people who spent more than they could afford on a "signaling good" that subsequently became much cheaper.