I've called this phenomenon 'the logarithmic shadow' because I beleive that incremental desire follows a log function. Could it be that this is all called marginal value?
How much do economists (and the economy) depend on the idea (reality?) that rich people don't want what poor people have?
For example, when I was a kid, I spent lots of money on PacMan. At the time, I could never imagine spending $100 on a binge - but I wanted to. I just didn't have the $100. Now that I have it, I'd never waste it on PacMan. Forgetting the 'signal wealth' stuff and the fact that PacMan can be had for free. How is the price of a quarter good for PacMan in such a way that it's cheap enough for poor folks, and 'too cheap' for rich people.
How can anything be 'too cheap' for rich people? Why don't we actually always go for the cheapest stuff? Most importantly, how can this fact be communicated to class warfare conspiracy theorists? If the rich get richer is it always bad news for the poor? Don't super-rich people want rich people to be suckers, not poor people?