A Louis Vuitton handbag is $3,000. People buy them to say, "You can't afford them." The day they start showing up on Amazon for $50 and people that live in single wides can afford them, the value drops to nothing, cause they aren't any more functional or valuable than a $30 bag, except as a status symbol.
It's a different level of idiocy for the NYTimes to complain that the poor to middle class can't afford status symbols, cause as soon as the poor and middle class can afford them, they're no longer status symbols.
And yeah, beyond a certain point, wine is nothing but a status symbol.
That's why he can afford to pay $90 million to running backs who always fumble the ball.
No doubt...Just as methods of conveyance, human companions with certain physical characteristics, homes, clothing, pets, jewelry, food and just about every other thing with a price tag on it....Old Thorstein Veblen gave it the moniker "Conspicuous Consumption"...