Bob Kolker wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >
> >
> > No. There is no such things as "needs" vs "wants"; no analytically
> > meaningful distinction at all.
>
> Without food we die. Without cosmetics we are just ugly. Food is
> necesssary for life. Most other stuff we buy or sell is not. What do you
> need to stay alive? Food, water, clothes and shelter (assuming a cold
> climate). Occassionaly medical help is required. Beyond these everything
> else is bupkus.

Nonetheless, there is no test you could show that would indicate a
meaningful difference in people's behavior that would indicate a valid
distinction between so-called "needs" and "mere wants". It's a moral
distinction you're making, not a valid objective distinction.

People want things. They don't need things. Some wants are felt more
intensely than others, but they remain wants.