Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Americans are spending less on clothing

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 344 posts

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#291

Post by sedachv »

slowmotiony wrote: post #75
dandare wrote: post #8

European here: when visiting my company HQ I was surprised how casual Americans dress for work. I am not saying devs should wear suit and tie, nothing like that, but even my bosses boss* was wearing what looked like a rumpled sweater with worn out jeans. And I don't mean like fashion statement rumpled and worn out, more like the "great depression" crumpled and worn out. Jules and Vincent in their new t-shirts would f…

I wish Germany was like that. I work as a IT consultant in a financial institution and we all have to wear suits here, even though most of the people have never seen a client in their life - they just sit behind their desks and do their daily work on a PC. So they do so - in a suit. I really don't know why Germans do this to themselves.

> I really don't know why Germans do this to themselves.

Yes, wearing a well-fitting, tailored suit made out of fabric with a good hand appropriate to the weather is a horrible (horribly comfortable) experience to subject yourself to. Having plenty of functional jacket pockets for all of your belongings is a special kind of hell.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#292

Post by cycrutchfield »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #249
ryanianian wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. I see two things happening here: (1) American spending less on clothing and (2) Americans having less self-pride in their attire and presentation. I've spent a fair amount of time in Latin American countries, and a real sure-fire way to identify tourists is to look for people poorly-dressed or those who look like they just don't care about how they look. E.g., despite much of Mexico being quite hot, you will al…

It's not "self pride" its a bucking of the trend of what "looks good" . It's not that I cannot afford to wear suits. Its that I dont like suits. Add in the marginal cost difference and I'd rather wear a tshirt. It's the market punishing the inefficiency of requiring your workers (or date) to dress in a certain manner when it adds no true value.

I would wager you are probably overestimating your (and the average American tourist’s) ability to “look good” in a T-Shirt.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#293

Post by kaybe »

emodendroket wrote: post #171
rsynnott wrote: post #133

I wonder if changes in washing machines are an issue, actually. America was really keen on top-loaders for a long time, and those damage clothes far more than front-loaders. As the US finally adopts front-loaders (and high-efficiency top-loaders, which use a different mechanism to the old ones), clothes will last longer.

Clothes are in a sense more "disposable" than ever though. Who's going to bother darning a shirt that cost less than ten bucks?

Me, it's less work than buying a new one.

(Unless the reason for the hole is that the fabric has aged too much - the next hole will open in about a week, so I don't bother.)

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#294

Post by potta_coffee »

walshemj wrote: post #225
joncrane wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I diagree. Phones only go up to about $900. But watches go up to the tens of thousands. Laptops only go up to about what, $5k or so? But jackets go up way more. Tech is more of a "as a bare minimum, I need to have the top of the line." Additionally, increased expenditure on tech does actually give increased utility in the form of performance. (even though it's reduced bang for buck). However, a $50,000 watch doesn't…

I bet my >$700 Barbour works better than a cheap one from Walmart - and as a bonus it will out live me :-)

What about a decent Carhartt jacket? Much cheaper than $700 and will still outlive you...assuming you don't sling concrete or frame houses in it.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#295

Post by emodendroket »

kaybe wrote: post #293
emodendroket wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clothes are in a sense more "disposable" than ever though. Who's going to bother darning a shirt that cost less than ten bucks?

Me, it's less work than buying a new one. (Unless the reason for the hole is that the fabric has aged too much - the next hole will open in about a week, so I don't bother.)

Well, OK, but, in general, I think most people don't even know what darning is anymore, let alone how to do it. I've never known anyone to not just throw out socks with holes in them, for instance.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#296

Post by WJW »

ryanianian wrote: post #257
maerF0x0 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "self pride" its a bucking of the trend of what "looks good" . It's not that I cannot afford to wear suits. Its that I dont like suits. Add in the marginal cost difference and I'd rather wear a tshirt. It's the market punishing the inefficiency of requiring your workers (or date) to dress in a certain manner when it adds no true value.

> It's not that I cannot afford to wear suits. Its that I dont like suits. I think you prove my point (and it's not a bad thing!) Sociology is interesting. A suit is traditionally a sign of "I invest in my clothes and therefore I have self-pride." (It's also a sign that you don't have to do hard/dirty labor.) It seems culturally America has decided that this is out-dated and are choosing to focus less on clothes as a…

If GP were heavily dependent on his/her job and in an environment where wearing suits is required, whether he/she likes suits would be completely irrelevant. Only because he/she apparently has a certain amount of power in their job (for example due to a sought-after skill like being a programmer) can this norm be overturned.

Over the decades, a suit has morphed from "I have power" to "I conform to the norm (and therefore I don't have power)" and with that change it is also apparent why people would want to not wear suits in an environment that traditionally required them.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#297

Post by kingnothing »

lg wrote: post #101
bballer wrote: post #58

With the exception of shoes and jackets I buy all my clothes at Goodwill. It's awesome! Every couple of months I spend around $20 dollars and I always have nice new tee shirts, button ups, pants etc. You wont believe how many nice clothes people simply give away. Plus it makes me feel great knowing I'm contributing to reuse and giving money to a company that helps employee less fortunate people.

you're lucky it fits you. the only sizes i see at thrift stores are L-XXL

Buy the big sizes then get the shirts tailored to fit for roughly $20-$25. You'll be wearing nice brands that fit perfectly.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#298

Post by bagacrap »

freejulian wrote: post #164
randcraw wrote: post #88

IMHO there are three clear causes for this trend: 1) US business fashion is increasingly casual. Ties, skirts, suits, coordinated outfits, scarves, leather soled shoes -- all are passe, even in button down East Coast Fortune 100 companies (other than for aspiring managers or those in banking/finance). 2) Color is passe. Shades of black and grey dominate wardrobes, especially in large cities. Thus fewer accessories ar…

All these explanations are rather complicated. I think the simplest explanation is the best: people don't have the free money to spend on clothing. This is evidenced by the following facts: 1) Wages have been stagnant 2) Cost of living has been increasing well beyond the stated 2% rate of inflation.

Wages have not been stagnant, in fact they have shown strong enough growth to raise scares of inflation.

I think focusing on the changing workplace as an influencer of clothing purchasing habits is spot on.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#299

Post by MichaelDickens »

sedachv wrote: post #291
slowmotiony wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Germany was like that. I work as a IT consultant in a financial institution and we all have to wear suits here, even though most of the people have never seen a client in their life - they just sit behind their desks and do their daily work on a PC. So they do so - in a suit. I really don't know why Germans do this to themselves.

> I really don't know why Germans do this to themselves. Yes, wearing a well-fitting, tailored suit made out of fabric with a good hand appropriate to the weather is a horrible (horribly comfortable) experience to subject yourself to. Having plenty of functional jacket pockets for all of your belongings is a special kind of hell.

You could wear comfortable and weather-appropriate t-shirt/sweater and jeans for about $50. A comparably comfortable and weather-appropriate suit will cost >$1000. I don't think it's hard to see why so many people don't want to wear a suit every day.

Re: Americans are spending less on clothing

#300

Post by sbov »

mattmanser wrote: post #106
toomanybeersies wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should not be buying 2 suits and half a dozen shirts per year. I wear tshirts daily and I don't even buy half a dozen tshirts per year. I have some that are over 5 years old. Spend more than the bare minimum on your clothes, and they will last you a long time. A suit should last you at least half a decade.

Are you fairly young? One day you'll suddenly have a revelation that 5 year old t-shirts look really, really, really bad. I certainly did. The color fades, the prints fade, they look tatty. Same with suits, knees and bums get a sheen, stitching gets ratty, etc. Obviously depends on how expensive the suit was when you bought it. To quote Sam Vimes: “The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because th…

In my experience, more expensive is usually just more expensive. I naively though the opposite, and at first just ended up paying more money for crap that lasted just as long as the cheap stuff.

If you want quality, you have to do the research.

Post reply on HN