tott said:
This is just ignorant and practically offensive. You don't get something for nothing.
The fabric itself costs money, it might be very cheap or very expensive depending on what kind it is. Interfacing, lining, buttons, zippers and so on costs money; more or less depending on quality.
The production methods are also more or less costly; carefully made clothes take longer to make and require more skill. More or less can be done by hand. The workers need to be paid, more or less depending on skill and location.
Obviously it won't cost a lot to produce clothes of inferior materials in Bangladesh or some other low-wage country, and these are the kind of clothes a lot of people buy at H/M, Gap and similar places. I believe that these clothes, with their low quality (most of the time) and low prices, has set a new low standard and has become the norm. Unfortunately.
Edit: Just wanted to add that I do realise that anything "designer" usually has a substantial mark-up, but the quality is also higher most of the time. If you want true quality and craftsmanship at a fair price, you should probably go to an old-school tailor or something...
Thank you everyone for your explainations. I'm sorry for wording things so poorly before.
My point was that so often there is a serious mark-up. I shouldn't have said "doesn't cost jack", I should have said that it usually costs a substantial amount less to make than what they're sold for. There are tons of things that there are rediculous mark-ups on, and clothing is definately one of those things. The music industry is good at that. Adobe is -really- good at that. The cosmetics industry--man, I don't even want to talk about that, they're one of the most unethical industries out there between their markups and the crap they put into their products and try to sell as being "healthy".
I definately agree with woodenhouse's comments. Spending thousands on something like a piece of clothing, no matter how much more it may -somehow- pay people working in a retail environment, really has -nothing- to do with being more ethical. Buying clothing not made in sweat shops is more ethical--it doesn't mean it has to cost more, and if it does, the people who made it are generally not the ones making more money from it, the top execs--and sometimes the designers themselves are the ones making the moola. I've worked in clothing retail (from thrift stores to stores like Macy's to more high-end stores), I know all about it. Something to take note of--the stores that charge a lot for their clothing generally make their employees wear things that cost as much as what they're selling--they have to keep up an image. I've tried working in those environments and have quit because of that whole high-end image crap (and the fact that I couldn't afford those things). When I said "making a killing on", I was referring to individual stands where the person who made the item is selling it themselves, and for thousands--they're making a killing on it. There -are- the individual stands where people are selling the products without rediculous markups, and those are the places that are gems to find and usually have products that are well made. I love finding those places!
No matter how much more something costs, it doesn't mean that the quality will be any better--that whole concept of higher price=higher quality is a MYTH. One has to research the clothing they buy to see whether it's actually made better. Just take designer jeans for instance--compare a pair of well made carharrt jeans to some $300 deisel jeans with built-in holes: which do you think will last longer? The entire clothing industry, and really any industry is the same way--you have to research what you buy. If you want clothing that isn't made at sweat shops, and if you want it to be well made, you have to do research, and then if you also want it to not be rediculously marked up, you have to do even more research. If one does all of those things, THAT is being more ethical.
BTW: I'll have you know, Scandababian, that I would never spend thousands on a piece of art, or $10,000 for a piece of furniture, or $40,000 on a car. I wouldn't spend $500,000 on a house either. I am not a hypocrite in this area. Wasteful spending is wasteful spending. Well-designed clothes may be art, but even art can be rediculously marked up. There are plenty of great artists who charge reasonable prices for their artwork, and many that charge WAY too little for their art. I'm a musician, and I wouldn't even think of charging $100 for a CD or $500 for concert tickets. Nobody is that frickin' important. Barbara Steisand with her $2000 concert tickets come to mind. I WILL judge people who spend exhorbanent amounts of money on everything they wear, everything they drive, everything they do--yes, I WILL judge people that do that--those same people generally look at those that are poor, especially homeless people, as being below them and they usually expect people to give them extra respect because of their income. Just ask anyone who is willing to spend $1000 on a bag about how they feel about homeless people--comments like "lazy" or "drug addict" or the such will usually be the first thing that comes from their mouths, even though they have no idea what the person has been through. Again, sorry for my wording, but this is a very touchy subject for me.