Log in
Instead of re-opening Alcatraz as super-max prison we should build a statue to America. I suggest “Lady Liberty of the Pacific”. The spirit of Columbia ala John Gast’s American Progress carrying a welcoming beacon-lamp in her raised right hand and a coiled fibre-optic cable in her left representing Bay Area technology.
The post Lady Liberty of the Pacific appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Comments
- Alex, I finally have agreed with you. by Cliff Hawley
- In reply to M. Everybody can earn 220$/h + daily 1K… You ... by Kevyn Shearer
- I think that whatever the intent of the coil of cable, it will ... by Some Toronto Guy
- In reply to Brown9554. Google “San Francisco street ... by Some Toronto Guy
- In reply to Nate. Oh, my God! Is that a M-F'n 'So I Married ... by Some Toronto Guy
- Plus 10 more...
Related Stories
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) recently tweeted that they wanted to bring back apparel manufacturing to the United States. Why would anyone want more jobs with long hours and low pay, whether historically in the US or currently in places like Bangladesh? Thanks in part to international trade, the real price of clothing has fallen dramatically (see figure below). Clothing expenditure dropped from 9-10% of household budgets in the 1960s (down from 14% in 1900) to about 3% today.
Apparently, however, not everyone agrees. While some responses to my tweet revealed misunderstandings of basic economics, one interesting counter-claim emerged–the low price of imported clothing has been a false bargain, the argument goes, because the quality of clothing has fallen.
The idea that clothing has fallen in quality is very common (although it’s worth noting that this complaint was also made more than 50 years ago, suggesting a nostalgia bias, like the fact that the kids today are always going to hell). But are there reliable statistics documenting a decline in quality? In some cases, there are! For example, jeans from the 1960s-80s, for example, were often 13–16 oz denim, compared to 9–11 oz today. According to some sources, the average garment life is down modestly. The statistical evidence is not great but the anecdotes are widespread and I shall accept them. Most sources date the decline in quality to the fast fashion trend which took off in the 1990s and that provides a clue to what is really going on.
Fast fashion, led by firms like Zara, is a business model that focuses on rapidly transforming street style and runway trends into mass-produced, low-cost clothing—sometimes from runway to store within weeks. The model is not about timeless style but about synchronized consumption: aligning production with ephemeral cultural signals, i.e. to be fashionable, which is to say to be on trend, au-courant and of the moment.
It doesn’t make sense to criticize fast fashion for lacking durability—by design, it isn’t meant to last. Making it durable would actually be wasteful. The product isn’t just clothing; it’s fashionable clothing. And in that sense, quality has improved: fast fashion is better than ever at delivering what’s current. Critics who lament declining quality miss the point—it’s fun to buy new clothes and if consumers want to buy new clothes it doesn’t make sense to produce long lasting clothes. People do own many more pieces of clothing today than in the past but the flow is the fun.
So my argument is that the decline in “quality” clothing has little to do with the shift to importing but instead is consumer-driven and better understood as an increase in the quality of fashion. Testing my theory isn’t hard. Consider clothing where function, not just fashion, is paramount: performance sportswear and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).
There has been a massive and obvious improvement in functional clothing. The latest GoreTex jackets, for example, are more than five times as water resistant (28 000 mm hydrostatic head) compared to the best waxed cotton technology of the past (~5 000 mm) and they are breathable (!) and lighter. Or consider PolarTec winter jackets, originally developed for the military these jackets have the incredible property of releasing heat when you are active but holding it in when you are inactive. (In the past, mountain climbers and workers in extreme environments had to strip on or off layers to prevent over-heating or freezing while exerting effort or resting.) Amazing new super shoes can actually help runners to run faster! Now that is high quality. Personal protective equipment has also increased in quality dramatically. Industrial workers and intense sports enthusiasts can now wear impact resistant gloves which use non-Newtonian polymers that stiffen on impact to reduce hand injuries.
Moreover, it’s not just functional clothing that has increased in quality. For those willing to look, there is in fact plenty of high-quality clothing readily available. From Iron Heart, for example, you can buy jeans made with 21oz selvedge indigo denim produced in Japan. Pair with a high-quality Ralph Lauren shirt, a Mackinaw Wool Cruiser Jacket and a nice pair of Alden boots. Experts like the excellent Derek Guy regularly highlight such high-quality options. Of course, when Derek Guy discusses clothes like this people complain about the price and accuse him of being an elitist snob. Sigh. Tradeoffs are everywhere.
Critics long for a past when goods were cheap, high quality, and Made in America—but that era never really existed. Clothing in the past was more expensive and often low quality. To the extent that some products in the past were of higher quality–heavier fabric jeans, for example–that was often because the producers of the time couldn’t produce it less expensively. Technology and trade have increased variety along many dimensions, including quality. As with fast fashion, lower quality on some dimensions can often produce a superior product. And, of course, it should be obvious but it needs saying: products made abroad can be just as good—or better—than those made domestically. Where something is made tells you little about how well it’s made.
The bottom line is that international trade has brought us more options and if today’s household were to redirect the historical 9 – 10 % share of income to clothing, it could absolutely buy garments that are heavier, better-constructed, and longer-lived than the typical mid-century mass-market clothing.
The post Has Clothing Declined in Quality? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Comments
- One measure of how much the real cost of clothing has fallen is ... by Scott Gustafson
- In reply to Steven. Consumer choice. They exist, but they're ... by Kaleberg
- In reply to From rags…. Do you remember when cartoonists ... by Kaleberg
- In reply to Hazel Meade. There's also the mass luxury market ... by Kaleberg
- In reply to Mitch Berkson. This is an example of brand ... by Kaleberg
- Plus 10 more...
Related Stories
Joe Nocera has a strange piece in the Free Press arguing that the “godfathers of protectionism” have been vindicated. It begins with a story about how Dani Rodrik couldn’t get a famous economist to endorse his book Has Globalization Gone Too Far? because doing so would arm the barbarians. Well give that reluctant economist a Nobel! because they were obviously correct. Tyler made the same point in his debate with Rodrik. Rodrik had no answer.
The piece is strange because there is little to no connection with any data; just assertion, vibe, and non-sequitur. Most bizarrely but hardly alone was this bit:
In the 1980s, Prestowitz was an official in Ronald Reagan’s Commerce Department, back when Japan, not China, was the trading partner the U.S. most feared. Japanese autos, televisions, washing machines, and all sorts of consumer electronics were flooding into the U.S., forcing American auto makers to close factories and even putting U.S. companies like Zenith out of business. Yet Japan was using tariffs and other less obvious trade barriers to prevent U.S. companies from exporting many of their products to Japan. It was protecting certain key industries from foreign competition.
This was not how the rules of free trade were supposed to work. Prying that market open, forcing Japan to play by the same rules as the U.S., was Prestowitz’s job.
He found it deeply frustrating. “Every time we completed a trade negotiation,” Prestowitz told me, “some economist would turn out a model to show that the deal was going to create X number of American jobs and would reduce the trade deficit by Y. And it never happened.”
Even more galling, he said, “The conventional response among economists was that it didn’t matter.” After all, even if Japan was keeping U.S. products out of its market, America still benefited from low-cost imports. Prestowitz has a vivid memory of a conversation he once had with Herbert Stein, President Richard Nixon’s former chief economist. “The Japanese will sell us cars,” Stein told him with a shrug, “and we’ll sell them poetry.”
Prestowitz also remembers the abuse he took for his views. “I was a Japan-basher, a protectionist, and so on,” he said. Paul Krugman, who was not yet a New York Times columnist but was already an influential economist, called Prestowitz “an intellectual snake-oil salesman” in a book he wrote called Pop Internationalism. The book, published in 1997, consisted of a half-dozen essays, each of which brutally attacked one or another of the handful of people who dared to say that globalization was less than perfect. (He described then-Labor Secretary Robert Reich as “not a serious thinker,” and Lester Thurow, the best-selling author and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, as “silly.”)
When I asked Prestowitz recently if he felt vindicated, he admitted that he did, but added that “I also feel a sense of loss that it took us so long to face reality and at such cost.”
Well here is data on GDP per capita in real terms in Japan and the United States since 1990. This is vindication???!
Or how about this:
No one anymore, on the left or the right, denies that globalization has fractured the U.S., both economically and socially. It has hollowed out once-prosperous regions like the furniture-making areas of North Carolina and the auto manufacturing towns of the Midwest.
Well the far left and the far right agree that America has become fractured and hollowed out, the Bernie Sanders-Donald Trump horseshoe. But both are wrong. For the rest of us in the happy middle, consider this–Hickory, North Carolina, once known as the furniture capital of the United States, did face some hard times. But in 2023 Travel and Leisure magazine named Hickory the most beautiful and affordable place to live in the United States! Writing:
Located in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, Hickory is a family-friendly destination known for its ample hiking trails and Southern charm. Currently ranked as the cheapest place to live in the U.S., Hickory has a median home price of $161,000. This affordable neighbor to the east of Asheville and north of Charlotte is popular with retirees, but it’s also becoming more attractive to young families; a steady stream of residents has been flocking here for its newfound fame as a technological hub for Google and Apple.
Doesn’t sound hollowed out to me.
The godfathers of protectionism haven’t been vindicated—but if they want to claim credit for President Trump’s tariff binge they’re welcome to it.
Addendum: Hat tip to Scott Lincicome on Hickory and do read Jeremy Horpedahl for details on the distribution of wages. Did you know, for example, that median weekly earnings for full time workers who graduated high school but are without a college degree are at an all time high? Switched earlier current for constant $2021 dollars in graph.
The post This is Vindication??? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Comments
- In reply to Frank Wrench. Are you offering counterevidence ... by HJWall
- In reply to Scott H.. What's funny is that I'm overall ... by Picador
- In reply to triclops. Look free trade with everyone and ... by Sure
- In reply to TGGP. Deprivation of power is manifestly what ... by JFL
- In reply to Anonymous. Dismissing my generalized comment by ... by Cleveland
- Plus 10 more...
Related Stories
From Noah Smith:
Trade deficits are an even smaller amount of GDP. U.S. imports of manufactured goods minus exports are equal to about 4% of GDP per year. Our trade deficit with China is about 1% of GDP.
In terms of imported components, America manufactures most of what it uses in production. China’s exports to the U.S. are actually more likely to be intermediate goods rather than the consumer goods we see on the shelves of Wal-Mart — another thing the typical narrative misses. But even so, China makes only about 3.5% of the intermediate goods that American manufacturers need
…trade deficits and manufacturing aren’t as tightly linked as most people seem to think. France has become steadily less manufacturing-intensive since 1960, despite the fact that it historically had very balanced trade, and even ran big trade surpluses in the 90s and 00s. Meanwhile, out of all the countries on the chart, Japan has done the best job of preserving its manufacturing share since 2010, despite running a trade deficit over that time period.
Excellent throughout, do read the whole thing.
The post Globalization did not hollow out the U.S. middle class appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Comments
- In reply to Geopolitical Bill. I don’t know that it’s ... by Jim
- In reply to Geopolitical Bill. Most of the things you ... by Ricardo
- I'd like to recommend a new book from the Cato Institute ... by Donald Pretari
- In reply to Jon. Housing isn't driven by foreign land ... by Watson
- In reply to triclops. And more importantly, Trump is ... by triclops
- Plus 10 more...
Related Stories