# data[].attributes.body
Paul Blooms essay which focuses on the reasoning behind people's desire to chase after luxury items which can be seen through his first line ,"Most people own things they don’t really need. It is worth thinking about why."(Bloom 1).

(The song link is only for the image but it is a good song)

# data[].attributes.body
Paul bloom starts out his essay with bringing up his question on why people buy certain items like a Prada handbag, an Armani suit or a Rolex.

# data[].attributes.body
This part focuses on some ideas on why people might want to buy luxury items or hold certain items dear.

# data[].attributes.headline
Part III: Luxury and Happiness + Conclusion

# data[].attributes.subject
Part III: Luxury and Happiness + Conclusion

# data[].attributes.body
This part discusses on how luxury affects our happiness and how such items may be useful to us

# data[].attributes.body
The author quotes from The substance of style, by Virginia Postrel that our reactions to items are immediate, perceptual and emotions. That we desire such things because of the pleasure we receive from it.

# data[].attributes.body
He further states that Postrel is pushing back against theories that state people buy luxury goods as a symbol of status or to signal their attractive traits.

# data[].attributes.body
Another school of thought suggests that people tend to buy luxury goods as a form of presenting social status, Even if we are unaware of it or may deny it

# data[].attributes.body
Paul Bloom goes on to show that concept known as signaling could be connected to the point made by Veblen about status symbols or Miller's theory of purchase of luxury products as a way to attract the attention of the mates.

# data[].attributes.body
Geoffrey Miller gives a theory that people purchase luxury goods to show attractive traits such as intelligence, ambition or power.

# data[].attributes.body
This paragraph from Paul bloom shows us multiple examples such as the one where your neighbors gasp at your beautiful car which represents both, social status and attractive traits.

An even better example of showing attractive traits would be the beer choice example.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul Bloom then goes on to reject the disapproval of these ideas because a person couldn't just opt out of buying such items as a show of statues. Taking an example from his essay that if everyone else decides to wear a fancy suit but u wear something non-luxury you just lower your chances of getting the job as it would be seen as informal.

# data[].attributes.body
The author then goes to show that although all of the point are true they aren't necessarily complete.

Discussed more in Part II.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul Bloom starts this part by taking a quote from Twitchell's Living it Up(2002) when he takes his daughter to a Armani store in Beverly Hills. She is fascinated by this store.

# data[].attributes.body
from Postrel's perspective it would look like she enjoys the fabric as it feels good to the touch and to look at.

# data[].attributes.body
Through Twitchell's perspective we see rich meaning in the suits sold at Armani.

# data[].attributes.body
Would Twitchell's daughter have had the same appeal towards the clothes she is touching at a discount rack as compared to the Armani suits?

# data[].attributes.body
This argument focuses on both ,the sensory and the social status argument. For just the price of $1200 you could get a near perfect replica of a Rolex instead of spending a premium of $30000.

# data[].attributes.body
From this perspective one could say the person would buy the replica.

But to everyone's surprise this doesn't work as people still prefer to buy the Rolex.

# data[].attributes.body
If a person wanted to show off social status they could've simply bought the replica yet people still go to buy the real even though they can barely be told apart.

# data[].attributes.body
Through the Rolex argument the author introduces a new factor based on the history of an object.

# data[].attributes.body
Objects owned by a Famous or Important person hold great value in the market.

Taking for example John F. Kennedy, whose golf clubs sold for $752500.

People have even gone so far to sell and buy items like Barack Obama's half eaten sandwich or Britney Spear's chewed up gum.

# data[].attributes.body
This shows us that history of an object holds great importance to why some people buy luxury goods.

So much so that some people wish to receive an item uncleaned so as to not remove signs of the previous owner.

# data[].attributes.body
Although history could be a big factor it doesn't affect all items as some items could be a personal history which others wouldn't care for even if you hold them dear, like an item you bought with your first paycheck or your child's baby shoes

# data[].attributes.headline
How others perspective on something changes yours on something you hold dear.

# data[].attributes.subject
How others perspective on something changes yours on something you hold dear.

# data[].attributes.body
It doesn't really change much if it is something you hold dear to your heart.

Like your mom's cooking, the taste doesn't change if someone else says they don't like it.

# data[].attributes.body
Something you buy for your own pleasure may make others envious of you as they can't afford the same luxuries as you.

Similarly if your neighbor owns a BMW , it will make u envious creating a circle of envy.

# data[].attributes.body
At the end Paul Bloom shares his own position over luxury items where he writes that he is anti luxury.

He then says what other perspectives might think about the purchase of luxury goods.

# data[].attributes.body
"I don’t think any of this is mistaken. But it is seriously incomplete."(Bloom 4).

# data[].attributes.body
"Now, only a philistine would deny Postrel’s point that some consumer preferences are aesthetic, even sensual. And only a rube would doubt that some people buy some luxury items to impress colleagues, competitors, spouses, and lovers."(Bloom 4).

# data[].attributes.body
"The pleasure of these objects does feel immediate and sensual. But Postrel is too quick to dismiss Twitchell’s claim about meaning. The shoppers know, after all, that they are stroking Armani suits. Would they react the same way if reaching into the discount rack at Marshalls offered the same sensory experience?"(Bloom 5).

# data[].attributes.body
"No doubt Rolex

loses some sales because people prefer the knockoff, but since the company is still in business, there are apparently enough shoppers who pay a premium of about $29,000 for an authenticity that makes no perceptible difference."(Bloom 5).

# data[].attributes.body
"Postrel quotes James Twitchell, in Living it Up (2002), talking about a visit to the Beverly Hills Armani store with his college-aged daughter. He describes how customers would stroke the suits and how his daughter, originally skeptical, found herself entranced by the items."(Bloom 4).