Hacker News Reader

Comment by GreedClarifies | Hacker News Reader

"indicator of wealth"

Maybe. I think it is an indicator of multiple things, one being wealth.

Another thing that comes to mind is of someone that needs to signal, badly, that they have wealth. Some people may be interested in those signals, but I hope/guess not too many.

PS: I'm all for people having wealth and spending it on things that make their lives better, but conspicuous consumption/Veblen goods/positional goods seem like some kind of ancient software in humans that hopefully will pass in time.

View on HN

There is conspicuous consumption, but it is not in the form of cars.

Who cares if a car is a limo or a Bentley? The comfort and quality and safety is relatively all the same, whether it is a $50k car or a $500k car. You are going to sit in it looking at your phone all the same.

But the higher bar to achieve is real estate, time, and professional network. Where you live, where and how you spend your time, and who you work with are all easy ways to determine socioeconomic status, so there is no reason to waste money on cars/jewelry/etc if you get no extra utility from them.

(As of Jan 2023) Warren Buffett famously drives a 2014 Cadillac XTS and owns only one car. Famously, because most other billionaires have much flashier cars, and warehouses full of cars.

You may not feel the difference between a $50k car and a single $500k car, but having seven $500k cars, one for each day of the week, in different colors, just hits different. It's conspicuous consumption, even if you don't notice or care about the particular object of the consumption.

There are people out there with just so much money that you can waste money on every half a whim, and still have... pretty much the same amount left over. It means you can buy jewelry you might want and just throw it away like you're in Brewster's Millions. At that level, who cares about utility?

Must be a boring life when nothing matters.

> It means you can buy jewelry you might want and just throw it away like you're in Brewster's Millions. At that level, who cares about utility?

If you want it, you are predicting it will give you utility. Even if it is just a few chemical reactions in your brain, and not an ROI measurable in currency.

From the references articles, the limos were significantly less safe than other cars because they often didn't have seat belts, and lacked the protection from the frame of a smaller car.

If you've ever watched a video[0] on how stretch limos are made (hint: it's even sketchier-looking than you'd expect), you'll get over the idea of riding in one pretty damned fast. Just thinking about a side-impact in one is nuts. The lack of seat belts is just the starting point.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ani9dWmdW_w

I'm with you on your PS but I don't think it will pass. I feel like humans are inherently comparative beings. We weigh and measure all humans we come in contact with and most are weighed by looks for a first impression. Some people are always going to measure by perceived wealth.

you're 100% right. people will readily jockey, compete, and gloat over the most artificial relative measures of heirarchy. think parking spots or badges in a video game.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com