7 ms·

It's funny to me that this is framed through such a negative lens, when they're basically just saying that ever more people are being lifted out of poverty, to

It's funny to me that this is framed through such a negative lens, when they're basically just saying that ever more people are being lifted out of poverty, to the point where our trash is no longer of value to them. I struggle to believe that old clothes will ever be a top ten most important environmental issue.

barbs 6y ago
> the textile industry accounts for more greenhouse-gas emissions than all international flights and maritime shipping combined; as recycling markets break down, its contribution could soar. This doesn't bother you?
forgotmypw17 6y ago
New clothes support sweatshops ... contain toxic dyes and conditioners ... are a huge source of pollution ... are of lower quality year by year (what I've been told by people who are into the scene) See also sibling comment.
SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
> top ten most important environmental issue. There are other issues, for instance: child labor makes most clothes in Asian countries. The labor is hidden behind opaque international sub-contracting agreements, making it impossible to audit the supply chain. Ethical clothes are expensive to make. Go to US Target store and you can buy a three-pack of "Fruit of the Loom" T-Shirts for about $10, go do Everlane, who explicitly states their profit, cost, and logistics chain, and T-shirts are $20/each. It is still running rampant in the past decade: [1] https://www.panaprium.com/blogs/i/fashion-brands-that-still-use-sweatshops https://www.panaprium.com/blogs/i/fashion-brands-that-still-... [2] https://phys.org/news/2017-06-tackling-child-labour-fashion-industry.html https://phys.org/news/2017-06-tackling-child-labour-fashion-...
- vrperson 6y ago
  Child labor is probably not caused by the demand for clothes, though. On the contrary, without those jobs, the situation of those families would be even more perilous.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Perhaps we can institute a tax in higher income/wealthier countries and transfer that straight to the poorer countries.
    - vrperson 6y ago
      That would be idiotic. We are well off because we can make cheap things (including food). To make things arbitrarily more expensive would make everybody worse off. Likewise clinging to inefficient means of production. The poor countries in Africa are poor because they can not produce as efficiently as other countries. Not because other countries give them cheap stuff. I mean we would be making things more expensive via taxes, and give the tax money to Africa so that they can buy things more cheaply. Why not just sell them cheaply to Africa to begin with? Cut out the middle (tax) man.
      - throw_m239339 6y ago
        > That would be idiotic. We are well off because we can make cheap things (including food). To make things arbitrarily more expensive would make everybody worse off. It would make the ultra rich a tiny less richer, but hey you can't have that. There is wealth in this world so that every single kid on that planet can go to school instead of working at the factory, it's just insanely badly distributed.
    - neilparikh 6y ago
      People in rich countries are (mostly) very nativist, so I doubt this kind of think would be popular. For whatever reason, people tend to value the lives of those in their country many times more than those in other countries. So unfortunately, buying their labor at cheap rates seems to be the best way to transfer wealth right now, at least a big scale [0]. [0] - On a smaller scale individuals can donate to charities like Against Malaria Foundation or GiveDirectly, which I highly recommend everyone does if they have excess wealth.
    - csomar 6y ago
      You are already doing that to some extent and in my opinion it has the reverse effect. That money will go to the government which is quite corrupt in these countries and will stronghold more authoritarian regimes. Child-labor is bad but it helps some families make money, and many of them break the poverty chain this way. It's not the best/most ethical way to do it, but let's not pretend that a few random folks on HN have the solutions for these third-world countries.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > child labor makes most clothes in Asian countries. Reminds me of a Jack quote from 30 Rock: > It's not "handmade in USA," it's pronounced "hahnd-made in Oosa." The Hand people are a Vietnamese slave tribe, and USA is their island prison. THEY made your jeans. Do you know how they get the stitching so small? [whispers] Orphans.
- alostpuppy 6y ago
  I have had good luck buying jeans and t-shirts made domestically. Does anyone know of a brand that makes socks in the US? I can’t seem to find any that are less than 20 a pair.
  - SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
    I'm in the same boat. The only US-made I found were by Gustin, but they were expensive and the elastic was meh. Everlane has yet to offer socks (non-US but very accountable). Allbirds has cheap(er) eco-groovy socks, but I don't know where they're made. Lemme know if you ever crack that nut, I'm glad I'm not the only person obsessed with trying to ethically source every item of clothing.
asdff 6y ago
What's more environmentally friendly: clear cutting land and irrigating it to growing cotton, spooling it and making it into textile, dying it, screen printing it cheaply with underpaid labor, and shipping it across the ocean, or buying that $5 shirt in your size that already exists in that goodwill in your neighborhood?
- ummonk 6y ago
  Well, the former lets someone have a job, however underpaid.
  - albatruss 6y ago
    This is a reason to challenge the value of jobs, not a reason to materially damage our irreplaceable environment. Social constructions must yield to material reality.
    - dsohn0 6y ago
      Yeah, like the material reality where people need to work. Talk about ironic.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    If you ate gonna waste money to create jobs you could habe a public works programm for planting trees, or have mandatory conscription and bigger military, or have government paid for education, or infrastructure, or any number of other things
    - ummonk 6y ago
      None of that transfers money from rich countries to poor countries.
      - abraae 6y ago
        Planting trees does. Indirectly by combatting climate change, which has proportionally negative impacts on poorer countries.
wvenable 6y ago
The article actually says that the price of new articles is approaching the price of recycled articles -- so it's not necessarily that more people are being lifted out of poverty -- but that we are producing more stuff for cheaper.
pedalpete 6y ago
Old clothes aren't the issue, it's the resources needed to make new clothes.

barbs 6y ago

> the textile industry accounts for more greenhouse-gas emissions than all international flights and maritime shipping combined; as recycling markets break down, its contribution could soar. This doesn't bother you?

forgotmypw17 6y ago

New clothes support sweatshops ... contain toxic dyes and conditioners ... are a huge source of pollution ... are of lower quality year by year (what I've been told by people who are into the scene) See also sibling comment.

SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago

> top ten most important environmental issue. There are other issues, for instance: child labor makes most clothes in Asian countries. The labor is hidden behind opaque international sub-contracting agreements, making it impossible to audit the supply chain. Ethical clothes are expensive to make. Go to US Target store and you can buy a three-pack of "Fruit of the Loom" T-Shirts for about $10, go do Everlane, who explicitly states their profit, cost, and logistics chain, and T-shirts are $20/each. It is still running rampant in the past decade: [1] https://www.panaprium.com/blogs/i/fashion-brands-that-still-use-sweatshops https://www.panaprium.com/blogs/i/fashion-brands-that-still-... [2] https://phys.org/news/2017-06-tackling-child-labour-fashion-industry.html https://phys.org/news/2017-06-tackling-child-labour-fashion-...

vrperson 6y ago
Child labor is probably not caused by the demand for clothes, though. On the contrary, without those jobs, the situation of those families would be even more perilous.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  Perhaps we can institute a tax in higher income/wealthier countries and transfer that straight to the poorer countries.
  - vrperson 6y ago
    That would be idiotic. We are well off because we can make cheap things (including food). To make things arbitrarily more expensive would make everybody worse off. Likewise clinging to inefficient means of production. The poor countries in Africa are poor because they can not produce as efficiently as other countries. Not because other countries give them cheap stuff. I mean we would be making things more expensive via taxes, and give the tax money to Africa so that they can buy things more cheaply. Why not just sell them cheaply to Africa to begin with? Cut out the middle (tax) man.
    - throw_m239339 6y ago
      > That would be idiotic. We are well off because we can make cheap things (including food). To make things arbitrarily more expensive would make everybody worse off. It would make the ultra rich a tiny less richer, but hey you can't have that. There is wealth in this world so that every single kid on that planet can go to school instead of working at the factory, it's just insanely badly distributed.
  - neilparikh 6y ago
    People in rich countries are (mostly) very nativist, so I doubt this kind of think would be popular. For whatever reason, people tend to value the lives of those in their country many times more than those in other countries. So unfortunately, buying their labor at cheap rates seems to be the best way to transfer wealth right now, at least a big scale [0]. [0] - On a smaller scale individuals can donate to charities like Against Malaria Foundation or GiveDirectly, which I highly recommend everyone does if they have excess wealth.
  - csomar 6y ago
    You are already doing that to some extent and in my opinion it has the reverse effect. That money will go to the government which is quite corrupt in these countries and will stronghold more authoritarian regimes. Child-labor is bad but it helps some families make money, and many of them break the poverty chain this way. It's not the best/most ethical way to do it, but let's not pretend that a few random folks on HN have the solutions for these third-world countries.
dehrmann 6y ago
> child labor makes most clothes in Asian countries. Reminds me of a Jack quote from 30 Rock: > It's not "handmade in USA," it's pronounced "hahnd-made in Oosa." The Hand people are a Vietnamese slave tribe, and USA is their island prison. THEY made your jeans. Do you know how they get the stitching so small? [whispers] Orphans.
alostpuppy 6y ago
I have had good luck buying jeans and t-shirts made domestically. Does anyone know of a brand that makes socks in the US? I can’t seem to find any that are less than 20 a pair.
- SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
  I'm in the same boat. The only US-made I found were by Gustin, but they were expensive and the elastic was meh. Everlane has yet to offer socks (non-US but very accountable). Allbirds has cheap(er) eco-groovy socks, but I don't know where they're made. Lemme know if you ever crack that nut, I'm glad I'm not the only person obsessed with trying to ethically source every item of clothing.

asdff 6y ago

What's more environmentally friendly: clear cutting land and irrigating it to growing cotton, spooling it and making it into textile, dying it, screen printing it cheaply with underpaid labor, and shipping it across the ocean, or buying that $5 shirt in your size that already exists in that goodwill in your neighborhood?

ummonk 6y ago
Well, the former lets someone have a job, however underpaid.
- albatruss 6y ago
  This is a reason to challenge the value of jobs, not a reason to materially damage our irreplaceable environment. Social constructions must yield to material reality.
  - dsohn0 6y ago
    Yeah, like the material reality where people need to work. Talk about ironic.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  If you ate gonna waste money to create jobs you could habe a public works programm for planting trees, or have mandatory conscription and bigger military, or have government paid for education, or infrastructure, or any number of other things
  - ummonk 6y ago
    None of that transfers money from rich countries to poor countries.
    - abraae 6y ago
      Planting trees does. Indirectly by combatting climate change, which has proportionally negative impacts on poorer countries.

wvenable 6y ago

The article actually says that the price of new articles is approaching the price of recycled articles -- so it's not necessarily that more people are being lifted out of poverty -- but that we are producing more stuff for cheaper.

pedalpete 6y ago

Old clothes aren't the issue, it's the resources needed to make new clothes.