Huh? (Seth Godin edition)

I've now read this very short post four times and still find myself scratching my head.

When people have their basic needs met, it's not uncommon for wants to magically become needs. It's our hardwired instinct to seek to fill unmet needs.

That pays off for any marketer that has persuaded his market that they need what he sells. It backfires when those 'needs' are seen for what they actually are--luxuries.

When you sell a want, you have to work harder, you must seduce the market, because wants are fickle, picky and not easily bullied.

So is Seth (we're on a first name basis) saying that in this case wants have the same perceived urgency as needs, or is he saying that they are in fact more superficial and thus hard for marketers to engage? It seems like if a consumer experiences a want as a need, he or she would be pretty receptive to a marketer peddling a solution for that "need."