http://www.lotusyogawear.com/

Pacific Trekking for fleecy stuff and jackets

Then I have some hemp clothes from a store in Victoria called ecoeverything.

http://www.ecoeverything.com/page_victoria.cfm

And I have other clothes from Dorothy Grant, she has closed her boutique, but one can still order direct.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
What about Mountain equipment co-op? My impression is they're a little bit pricier but a far better quality.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
Thanks for the Dorothygrant.com link Remind. Next time I need a $3,000.00 leather jacket I will know right where to go.

---

1) $3,050.00 leather jacket
2) $3,336.00 cashmere coat

They both look like beautiful pieces of clothing but my comment was certainly not a misrepresentation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
Remind, there are two products for men on the site:

1) $3,050.00 leather jacket
2) $3,336.00 cashmere coat

They both look like beautiful pieces of clothing but my comment was certainly not a misrepresentation.

The cheapest product for women seems to be a Vancouver Bag for approximately $200.00.

---

As much as I have argued with remind way too often, I don't want this thread to degenerate into a flame remind thread. Let's focus on the main point and associated points. I don't really mean anything about your tone per se, but there's five inquisitive/dismissive posts in a row without these posts offering their own suggestions.

Chicago, where does your conscience take you clothes shopping? Or are you, like me, someone who has not thought much about that particular area yet? Are the links above evidence that it is impossible to buy nice clothing with a conscience if one is not uber wealthy? Would that be inherent? Are there other choices?

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
The cheapest product for women seems to be a Vancouver Bag for approximately $200.00.

---

Wrong. There was a scarf for $165.

Obviously not too many of us are going to be able to afford to buy clothes from that site. But I don't actually have a problem with clothing made through fair trade or no-sweat practices being a little more expensive. Personally, I think in North America, the average person has WAY too many clothes, way more than necessary, and these days, I think people THINK they need a lot more clothes than they actually do because our standards for how many clothes we "need" are affected by how much slave-labour there is out there.

Considering how few clothing stores there are out there that are no-sweat, I'd probably include AA on my list of acceptable shops for me to buy clothing from, since they pay their workers acceptable wages, try to be environmentally-friendly, etc. That to me outweighs a controversial advertising policy. Most clothing manufacturers use sweatshops where women are paid pennies a day AND they're raped, sexually harrassed, and put at risk of injury and death because of substandard equipment and being locked into a building which is a fire hazard. At AA, they have the issue that the boss is a letch and doesn't like unions (and has managed to convince the majority of his workforce that they don't either), but the vast majority of the other concerns with the third-world sweatshops are not present with AA.

I'm glad AA's hypocrisy is being exposed when it comes to resisting unionization and the alleged sexualized atmosphere of the workplace. But on the whole, it's a lot better than most of the clothing choices out there. In fact, I'm one of the ones on babble who has spoken out in past threads against AA and I hope that they're pressured into cleaning up some of the remaining issues with their business. But unfortunately, there aren't a lot of shopping options out there yet, especially for those of us who aren't one-size-fits-all, don't have enough money for $90 yoga pants, and can't wear union-made t-shirts and yogawear to work every day anyhow.

Of course, the point is moot with me with regards to AA, because their "XL" is a size 12. I'm sure that most of the clothes in my closet are sweatshop-made. Ain't a lot of fair trade large-sized clothes out there.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

That's not the only place I buy clothes, though.

Clothes at ecoeverything are about the same price a quality clothes anywhere. The same is said for Lotusyogawear.

Yes, I spend money for quality clothes, and look after them well, so they last years. I never spend more than 200-300 dollars a year on clothes and have some in my closet that are a couple of decades old.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
I never spend more than 200-300 dollars a year on clothes and have some in my closet that are a couple of decades old.

---

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... that's very frugal of you. Perhaps it's a little easier when you stopped growing vertically and horizontally a few decades back, so you already own most of what you need? I think I spend around a thousand a year right now on clothing and shoes. Actually, upon checking my homemade excel financial file, I've spent $ 692,88 so far this year on clothing and shoes. Soon to buy more as I want to own a second suit, my old sandals are falling apart... And then of course I'm the type of person who loses hats, scarves and gloves every winter. Admittedly, I really need to improve my laundry practices. That would be most consistent with Pogo's advice, to be quoted below so it can be shown a second time:

quote:

---

The best way to buy responsibly is to not buy at all if possible, reuse what you have, and buy someone else's cast off (Reduce, reuse, recycle).

---

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
The cheapest things I saw in those links for men was a 20$ pair of underwear and a 35$ t-shirt.

Too rich for my blood.

---

Ok, Stephen, I've been meaning to ask you this for ages but was too embarrassed, but since you've broached the subject:

What brand of underwear do you favour?

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... that's very frugal of you. Perhaps it's a little easier when you stopped growing vertically and horizontally a few decades back, so you already own most of what you need?

---

Yes, especially coats and suits and also
I buy classic lines in clothes so they never really go of style. And I buy vintage clothing, as well as shop second hand when purchasing about home clothes. I also dye my black and dark clothes that fade out. Have been this size since I was 12, so, it is easy to store and recyclce my own clothes that are more trendy.

My mom had this great shoe collection, from way back to the 50's and 60's, and I keep my own also, so I recycle shoes as they come in and out of style, and am a regular at getting new heels etc.

quote:

---

I think I spend around a thousand a year right now on clothing and shoes.

---

I could not imagine spending that amount on clothes per year.

quote:

---

Admittedly, I really need to improve my laundry practices.

---

I hang dry all my clothes, and hand wash what needs it, such as woolens and silks. I also use starch in the cottons to keep them fresh and new looking.

The Maquila Solidarity Network regularly publishes information about retailers that use more conscientious suppliers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Ok, Stephen, I've been meaning to ask you this for ages but was too embarrassed, but since you've broached the subject:

What brand of underwear do you favour?

---

Whatever's cheapest. And you know, I have no qualms about paying less.

I suppose it was only a matter of time before I had to challenge the underlying theme of this thread, namely, that buying clothes produced in poor countries by workers making poor-country wages is unethical. It isn't. The best explanation is given in Paul Krugman's celebrated essay In Praise of Cheap Labor:

quote:

---

Such moral outrage is common among the opponents of globalization--of the transfer of technology and capital from high-wage to low-wage countries and the resulting growth of labor-intensive Third World exports. These critics take it as a given that anyone with a good word for this process is naive or corrupt and, in either case, a de facto agent of global capital in its oppression of workers here and abroad.

But matters are not that simple, and the moral lines are not that clear. In fact, let me make a counter-accusation: The lofty moral tone of the opponents of globalization is possible only because they have chosen not to think their position through. While fat-cat capitalists might benefit from globalization, the biggest beneficiaries are, yes, Third World workers.

---

quote:

---

And as long as you have no realistic alternative to industrialization based on low wages, to oppose it means that you are willing to deny desperately poor people the best chance they have of progress for the sake of what amounts to an aesthetic standard--that is, the fact that you don't like the idea of workers being paid a pittance to supply rich Westerners with fashion items.

In short, my correspondents are not entitled to their self-righteousness. They have not thought the matter through. And when the hopes of hundreds of millions are at stake, thinking things through is not just good intellectual practice. It is a moral duty.

---

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]

When I do buy new I generally buy for simple style, and don't make much of an effort to go local-Canadian-fair trade. I should address that.

I'm not sure why Remind's links are being dissected. A business has to charge for quality material and workmanship. I personally wouldn't buy a thousand or three thousand dollar coat, but if the material and workmanship equation adds up for someone with the funds who are we to judge? An expensive coat, well made by an artisan, may last a lifetime and then some. Buy less, buy quality, and it generally lasts longer and will presumably be taken care of as an investment over time. Better than buying three, or five, coats, I'd suggest, in materials alone. A good example of this is footwear. I need high end footwear for work and play, and used shoes don't cut it for me. I've spent seemingly unreasonable sums of money on sandals and hiking boots (I try for Canadian here) and felt that every penney was worthwhile. Or I can buy cheaper and have to replace regularly. Of course, I've been burned by buying high end crap, too.

I generally like Krugman...except when it comes to globalization. Here's a better one, which touches on at least a few of the obvious problems with the official dogma:

Edited to remove non-sequitor, sorry 1,2,3.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: EriKtheHalfaRed ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
And I find it very offensive that I am being slammed because I buy local/Canadian and environmentally friendly clothes.

---

Yeah, gee, getting slammed really sucks, doesn't it? Did anyone in this thread call you stupid? Because I seem to remember you calling those of us who work for rabble "stupid" in that other thread, and implying that we're sellouts.

Honestly, I don't think anyone was trying to "slam" you in this thread. One person made a joke about the extremely expensive clothes at one of your links.

I think it's great that you buy clothes from those places. Other people might have a problem with those places (either with the product, the price, or whatever) and they have just as much right to post their views as you do. I don't think anyone was faulting you for shopping at those companies, though.

Speaking for myself, I was quite interested in seeing them, because I'd never heard of any of those companies before. In fact, I'll probably pass them along if I'm ever talking to someone who is interested in finding some nice stuff like that yogawear.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
I don't feel bad about where my clothes come from. I buy them to look good.

---

Would you buy clothes made from slave labour where the manufacturing process requires pouring lead into a river that feeds millions?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Farmpunk:
I'm guessing half my clothes have been bought used, second hand. There are some incredible bargains out there, especially in coats. A lot of my clothes are work clothes, or end up that way, and get serious abuse, so it doesn't make sense to buy new threads that end up covered in oil, burned, or ripped apart.

When I do buy new I generally buy for simple style, and don't make much of an effort to go local-Canadian-fair trade. I should address that.

...I've spent seemingly unreasonable sums of money on sandals and hiking boots (I try for Canadian here) and felt that every penney was worthwhile. Or I can buy cheaper and have to replace regularly. Of course, I've been burned by buying high end crap, too.

---

My partner buys Carhartts for work, they are expensive, though about the same price as designer jeans, but they last literally for years, and he is tough on them, would go through 5-6 pairs of work jeans a year. But the legs and knees are double materialed. He wears a 38 inseam and cannot get second hand ones easily. he had a pair patched just recently that are at least 6 years old, the pockets blew.

You should sign up and be a test wearer of them, they give them to you for free.

He is the same way about his footwear, buys expensive, usually Harley Davidson,though work pays 85% x2 per year.

I have no idea the conditions they are made under but they are great quality and say they are made in NA.

Here is the link to them and to sign up for test wearing for free samples.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:

Would you buy clothes made from slave labour where the manufacturing process requires pouring lead into a river that feeds millions?

If not, then we've established you've drawn a line. Where is it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

So it's hard to know what to do beyond supporting organizations that help to organize these shops or help the women and children who work for them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:

I really don't care. I'd rather have the shirt than make the tedious search to make sure that it is certified eco-friendlyfair-trade non-slave vegan save-the-whales-profit share.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Yeah, gee, getting slammed really sucks, doesn't it? Did anyone in this thread call you stupid? Because I seem to remember you calling those of us who work for rabble "stupid" in that other thread, and implying that we're sellouts.

---

Fair enough, but I did not call stupid, I asked if it was stupidity.

quote:

---

One person made a joke about the extremely expensive clothes at one of your links.

---

Dorothy Grant's are actually Haida art forms, not just clothes. Which is why I was sort of teed off.

quote:

---

Speaking for myself, I was quite interested in seeing them, because I'd never heard of any of those companies before. In fact, I'll probably pass them along if I'm ever talking to someone who is interested in finding some nice stuff like that yogawear.

---

I always buy at their, yogawear once a year sale if I can. And I would like to buy exclusively hemp clothes, and paper. But there has to be a bigger demand.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pogo:

The best way to buy responsibly is to not buy at all if possible, reuse what you have, and buy someone else's cast off (Reduce, reuse, recycle).

---

Is this a comment on the impossibility of ethical, budget-restricted clothes shopping? Because perpetually patching and reusing old clothes and castoffs doesn't seem feasible in the contemporary urban world if you want to be social or need to go to a job looking OK.

quote:

---

These people absolutely must be stopped.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
What if you don't have tap water?

---

Then you have running water. Run to the creek with a pail.

The water source for bottled water is on the label. How dumb can folks be to buy tap water at inflated prices? The next thing,Coca-Cola will be selling them dirt in a plastic box accompanied by a flashy ad campaign to convince them that owning a box of their dirt is derigeur,trendynistawise.

The same dummys that buy tap water in a fancy Coca-Cola bottle to "hydrate" themselves will trip over themselves and anyone in their way to acquire a box of dirt from Coca-Cola.

I get a kick out of the idiots who pay someone to cut their lawn so that they can drive their SUV down to the $80/month "gym" and loaf aboot in their sweat-shop LuluLemon finery and ever present bottle of tap water in a trendy flask.
Those clowns will definitely buy a flashy box of dirt.

I feel better now,nothing like a good rant at the expense of pretentious twits.

Look, just cause a job wasn't there before doesn't mean that said job couldn't pay more anymore, or conversely that said job will pay more with a bit of local organizing (specially in less than democratic nations many sweatshops now prefer) or that said job couldn't still be done at home (taking into account other costs like added transport, global warming, resources like water etc) with less harm to our own once proud manufacturing sector, or even that third world workers themselves may not have better opportunities going to school at age twelve instead, or that transnationals like Nike or Walmart are the best routes to ever improve their living conditions (as assumed here too apparently) and therefore the global consumer markets "we" assume must follow. (the big neo-liberal blank spot I mentioned earlier, covered over by modest and possibly temporary gains being made by some in select spots like undemocratic China)

Some of those are ethical questions, specially for those of us on the consumer side of the market, and some are practical questions of survival, like for instance how do now dispossessed Chinese peasants make a living themselves in now higher priced Beijing, on wages as low as thirteen cents an hour. Or how can our own now struggling industries ever compete against that and still be able to pay enough for our own modestly lower cost underwear? I don't know what a "left" is even supposed to be, without some awareness of bigger picture economic consequences than go beyond indivudual tastes or circumstances.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jas:

Re: above comments on boycotts: I think there are different perspectives from sweat-labourers. If you haven't already, watch the doc on mall-wart "W**-***t :the High Cost of Low Price". It includes a few (not many, admittedly) interviews, but best of all, it clearly outlines how this company in particular is changing the standard for all retail manufacturers, with its apparently conscious intent to steadily and indefinitely lower the bar globally. In fact, their insistence on squeezing more and more out of their constantly shifting line of suppliers seems to me to be bent more on ideology or some perverse capitalist competitiveness than on sound economics or the principles of free enterprise. This is not free enterprise. They are trying to create their own economy, valuing resources far lower than can be sustained, and producing utter crap and lowering retail standards worldwide. These people absolutely must be stopped.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jas:
Is this a comment on the impossibility of ethical, budget-restricted clothes shopping? Because perpetually patching and reusing old clothes and castoffs doesn't seem feasible in the contemporary urban world if you want to be social or need to go to a job looking OK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pogo:

My wife and I both work in an office environment that has an informal dress code. I am able to get all my work clothes second hand and my wife is able to get about 80%. I have 150 ties which is my indulgence, though I refuse to pay more than $1.00 per tie and most were $.25 or $.50. It is very feasible for us.

---

It's virtually impossible to find a company that is doing no damage to the environment even throug the simple act of shipping their clothes from their manufacturing facility to you.

None of us are perfect here, and should lay off the harsh criticisms of each other (other than Heywood, the 'I don't have time to care' attitude isn't cool with me ).

On top of that, the gear is excellent and lasts forever. I bought a 'rugged' briefcase there about 10 years ago for use in the bush (treeplanting supervisor). Not only did it survive several years of intensive bush usage, but everything else I've done to it since. I walked into my office today with the thing. Ditto a backpack and tent, though they are used less often (presumably they will be bequeathed to my grandchildren or something at this rate).

For other clothes, I'm a big fan of thrift stores. Most of my 'office casual' shirts come from Value Village or Salvation Army, presumably with the ethical taint laundered off somewhere between the original purchaser and myself. I can get a half dozen good shirts for $25, in less than 20 minutes of shopping.

As such, the Maquila Solidarity Network - in its Christmas Campaign - puts pressure on Canadian retailers to list their suppliers only.

http://en.maquilasolidarity.org/

It sounds simple, but more than a few retailers still refuse to play ball. YM, Harry Rosen, Boutique Jacob, International Clothiers, Grafton Frazer, Forzani and Le Chateau scored a *ZERO* in the ETAG report card for 2006.

http://en.maquilasolidarity.org/node/230

You don't need to boycott these stores - just point out to anyone within earshot each and every time their name comes up. Eventually, they will get the message.

Some other comments:

1234567 said:

quote:

---

But then again how many countries do we trade with that have seen their standard of living go up over time because of trade with us? I can't think of any can you?

---

If you read Krugman he makes a compelling case that free trade raises wages in these countries in ways that other methods cannot.

Erik said:

quote:

---

yet there's still no sign that said "high tech" jobs were popping up there either

---

Lots of high tech jobs are happening in other countries - Ireland, India and China are countries that have added jobs in this sector. I worked as a recruiter for awhile - in that capacity I spoke to a person (the first I had ever heard of) who moved from Canada TO India to take a high tech job.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
I don't feel bad about where my clothes come from. I buy them to look good.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
Sorry, Don Rickles is visiting here, and posted under my name.

---

----

Sorry, I was never one to lay off a fast ball down the middle, and I have been a good boy for such a long time here.

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]