Are these lifestyle changes based on dispatching the things that are of the least utility or, alternatively, the things that are the least conspicuous? Is there a difference? Using law firms as an example, between layoffs, trimming summer programs, and the like, which pattern do they seem to follow? -- KahlilWilliams - 26 Mar 2009

My immediate reaction to this article was a complete lack of sympathy and utter shock at the way these millionaires are reacting to the economic crisis. Shouldn't they recognize that they can give up certain luxuries and still be among the nation's wealthiest? Do they not recognize that many individuals can't even pay their mortgages and feed their families? On further reflection, I recognize that these millionaires' livelihoods might be based upon their previous patterns of conspicuous waste. As Eben pointed out in class, success in certain business ventures (including management of large non-profit organizations) is often dependent upon assuming a high-class lifestyle.

I'm not sure whether we can analyze the waste that is being discarded in a Veblen sense, as it seems like these individuals are running on fumes and not giving sufficient thought to their spending habits. Moreover, since this article presents a very small sample of individuals, it may not represent the general trend of cutting back for the nation's elite. Nonetheless, it does appear that these individuals are attempting to discard their least conspicuous habits, such as those expensive personal training sessions. From a rational perspective those training sessions (at $165 an hour) are not nearly as important as the jet-setting (at $10,000 an hour), but if these individuals can maintain their place in society by cutting out their personal trainer then it may be worthwhile to them.

-- LaurenRosenberg - 30 Mar 2009