Re:The anti-abundance critique on housing is wrong
by JackYoustra on Friday August 01, 2025 @02:56AM
(#44753757)
This is substantially better than really bad apartments that are expensive or nice apartments that are very expensive!
It is not actually more complex, you don't spend ~40% of CPI on apparel.
Re:The anti-abundance critique on housing is wrong
by oftenwrong on Friday August 01, 2025 @07:34AM
(#44755403)
I don't think clothing quality has fallen. Quite the opposite. We are able to buy high quality clothing at a very low price. More advanced materials, more consistent construction, better construction, greater selection, etc.
Much of what you can buy today did not even exist 30 years ago. For example, trail running shoes more or less did not exist. Perhaps you could have had a pair custom made, at a high price, with the worse materials available at the time, but today you can them "off the shelf".
Even the many shirts I've received for free are very high quality and have endured years of abuse.
Re:The anti-abundance critique on housing is wrong
by mactrey on Friday August 01, 2025 @03:25PM
(#44761263)
> the quality of available clothing across the world have fallen
Do you have a source for this? Anecdotes along the lines of "they don't make 'em like they used to" are incredibly common but often fail to stand up to scrutiny.
Re:The anti-abundance critique on housing is wrong
by h2zizzle on Friday August 01, 2025 @04:44PM
(#44762285)
Circumstantially, the dominance of fast fashion, produced quickly and sold cheaply, suggests that some aspect of production is more "efficient" than historically so. I've seen YouTube fashion experts explain exactly how (lower quality fabrics, simpler and less durable sewing, cuts that use less fabric than would be so in higher quality garments), and while I'm not experienced enough to corroborate, they were convincing.
These things are much more complex than simplistic single-variable models.