i'd love to know what % of my income i spend on cloths. actualy, on second thoughts, maybe thats not such a good idea.

sator - I'm not sure that I disagree with anything you've said. I came across the graph and info when looking at other stuff on economics.

I suspect that in economic terms if we (USA - but I'm assuming it holds true for most nations) spend less as a proportion of income then we are better off and the goods must be better because if they weren't we would be spending more as a proportion to be clothed due to replacing inferior goods.

Another point is that is probably the rise in income rather than improvement and drop in price of clothing (and footwear) that accounts for much of the fall in proportion.

The bit that interests me is that lets accept that the statement is true that we spend less on clothes as a proportion then it seems we should also be able to spend a bit more on clothes to get better quality (better quality defined as better looking, better fitting, better colours, better wearing,) After all isn't that what we do with other goods such as electrical, fridges etc, cars, furniture - that is as cost goes down through volume, and affordability goes up through rising disposable income then we tend to move toward quality - better , more safer cars that last longer, more sophisticated espresso coffee machines at home, bigger crisper TVs.

To go off on a slight side note here - its a sad thing that with the advent of online music, MP3s etc we have seen a decline in the quality of the FIDELITY or HIFI-ness of the sound available. So that a majority of music is played at bit-rates well below CD quality and through speakers of inferior quality. Somehow the advent of online delivery and size compression reversed a powerful trend that had been going on in music for years. The trend was that music was approaching HIFi more and more each year or so. There is no reason why it could not resumed that upward trend to fidelity - there is certainly the broadband and there are compression methods that are lossless and can and do deliver Masters quality sound.

Maybe the clothing /footwear industry will follow the music industry and perhaps have a tendency to revert back to improvements in quality, HiFi if you like, and a small, it will always be small, but it can be significant, number of persons will produce and supply for those who want hi fidelity in their clothes and footwear.

As far as I can see the academic and training institutions, the Schools of Fashion and Design, have abandoned their role as custodians of techniques and skills and have adopted a bastardised version of post modernism that says anything goes.

You Cutter and Tailor and Shooey’s projects with footwear offer some hope that techniques and skills will be at least recorded if not continued actively.  The problem is that many of these artisanal crafts like tailoring and cordwaining are subject to their own misguided “secrets” and passing on of traditions and skills by long low paid apprenticeships and oral ways through trusted family etc.

It doesn’t have to be this way and not everything old is correct, efficient useful or even high quality. The very people who are likely to be the good tailors and shoemakers are not likely the be great writers of text books or online manuals.

This is where our educational institutions owe us, themselves, the past and the future to record and teach these methods. This is one area were I would be more than happy to see grants and subsidises to document and retain these skills.

Last edited by fxh (2011-02-27 08:43:34)

Last edited by Sator (2011-02-27 17:24:19)

Last edited by Alexandre Orlov (2011-02-28 08:07:12)

Averages peoples do not cares about fancy clown tailoring styles as promotes by Srators.

Peoples do cares about social impacts of clothes. If lesser qualitat tailoring style produce sames social effects, it will be acceptibles, especials if others also wearing such styles. So spending less and getting same results.

Last edited by Alexandre Orlov (2011-02-28 14:58:56)