So, I understand using the statement that "poor blacks are more likely to live among other poor blacks than poor whites are to live among other poor whites, poor black families are more susceptible to being pulled into a signaling game with their neighbors." But why would you follow this statement with the kind of "proof" you use?

Your follow up example is of a median income black family living among other median income black families, and then of a lower income white family living among median white families.

Also, I'm interested in how conspicuous is being defined here. Simply buying something out of one's price range (a newer car rather than an older one) is not as conspicuous as buying an older car and then pimping one's ride. In minority cultures, the signaling seems louder.

Finally, the tagline of your article says that Cosby is "wrong about why" African Americans spend a lot on sneakers. It seems that Cosby never states "why" they do, he just indicates that there is a culture of consumption...something that you then prove.