First, if you have ever read Veblin you would know that he viewed spending money on your childs education was a form of conspicious consumption. I know alot of people who send their kids to private schools and for the most part spending seems to be motivated by as much by showing status as a desire to provide children with a good education. From my perspective this is a cultural. Where I grew up which was rural, people did not send their kids to private schools. Now I live in a metropolitan area and sending kids to private schools is more common. The difference is that kids benifit from the keeping up with the Jones when it involves their parents spending money on education.

Second, the data shown in the acutal study is only aggregrated at the state level. Most of the states with low income levels are southern states. There may be a cultural element involved. The fact that these states also have a higher percentage of blacks may also have an influence because black and white people in south interact with each other more.

Third, the study states that 60% of the spending is atrributed to the racial reference group. Here is where science and journalism split. Journalist want to make a definitive statement that Cosby is either wrong or right. However, science typically shows things are much more complicated. Assuming that the 60% figure is right then the 40% can be factors influenced by the very issues that Cosby addressed.

<link>

Nice point on Veblin and kudos for following up to read the article. Question for you -- thought the article only addressed how much consumption varied by group, NOT its' causes. As such, wouldn't seem to impact Cosby's assertion much either way except to support the fact that he wasn't just generalizing when he said that minority families did in fact spend a lot on flashy stuff. Mistaken?

"And if so, what, exactly, makes black Americans more vulnerable to the allure of these luxury goods?" I believe the point of the article is the that spending on visible consumption is "natural", therefore, predetermined and unalterable which is contrary to what Cosby seems to say. However, if you the study even the author of the studies state this only accounts for 60% of the spending behavior. No where does the author of the article ever acknowledge that there are other factors that may contribute. Interesting enough in the "Blank Slate" Steven Pinker implies that behaviour is 50% genetic and 50% social.