5 ms·

>Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s? Yes. Ask some of your older relatives who remember that time how often they got hand-me-do

>Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s? Yes. Ask some of your older relatives who remember that time how often they got hand-me-downs or patched old clothes up and compare it to the wardrobe of an average income American today.

pyth0 1y ago
Could this be due to how low quality many clothes are nowadays and they are simply not lasting long enough to become hand-me-downs?
- Workaccount2 1y ago
  The fault is firmly with the consumer. People are addicted to cheap shit and consuming like crazy. We had cheap clothes 10 years ago, then Shein and their ilk showed up with even cheaper clothes, and people flocked to them in droves. And you can still buy good quality clothes, $120 shirts and $150 pants of good quality are readily available. But who wouldn't want to have 10 shirts and 5 pants instead?
  - quickthrowman 1y ago
    Where can I find good quality (by this I mean durable) shirts for $120 and pants for $150? I’ve examined clothing in that price range and it’s virtually just as bad as $20 fast fashion: synthetic fibers mixed with cotton, poor stitching, loose weave on the fabric, etc. If you have brand names for polo shirts, jeans, and chinos that are durable and long lasting, please share them because I can’t find them. I have yet to place a test order at Bill’s Khakis, I should do that.
    - FireBeyond 1y ago
      So far (only six months in), Normal Brand (https://thenormalbrand.com/ https://thenormalbrand.com/) has been good to me. Seems better quality, nothing I have is synthetics, well stitched.
      - quickthrowman 1y ago
        Thanks, this fits my style and budget, I’ll give this place a shot!
  - terribleperson 1y ago
    Can you really get $120 shirts and $150 pants of good quality? J. Crew and Brooks Brothers and the like have gone downhill.
- Lu2025 1y ago
  This is correct. On average I go through a pair of jeans and a pair of hiking pants a year. 30 years ago I wore my dad's jeans quite a bit as a teenager, I remember even passing a driving test in them.
- Cthulhu_ 1y ago
  Perhaps, but if clothes are cheap, income is disposable and fashion is fast, why bother? Other than jeans, shoes, socks and underwear, I haven't worn through or grown out of anything in forever, nothing to pass on really. That said, the textile collection and resale industry is huge; stuff gets sorted, parts go to secondhand shops and charity, part gets baled up and exported, parts get recycled, etc. Same with electronics, it ends up in low-wage countries in Africa and south-Asia where there's thousands of people processing it.
ndriscoll 1y ago
That's not impoverished; it's just not wasteful. Half my kids' clothes are from Once Upon A Child, and most of my younger one's are hand-me-downs from the older one. For that matter, I'm wearing 20 year old gym shorts right now.
fn-mote 1y ago
What? It’s the 80s not the 50s. Hand me downs might have been a cultural thing, but “average” people weren’t wearing them out of necessity. I think you’re conflating a culture that did not see everything as disposable with a lack of wealth. The hard stats since I looked them up: Median income increases by 1/3 in inflation adjusted (“real”) dollars from late 80s until 2020. The country is definitely more wealthy. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mepainusa672n https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mepainusa672n
dfxm12 1y ago
This is not evidence for what you are saying. Handing down stuff, including clothes doesn't equate to poverty, sometimes the opposite. Better clothes also last longer. Check out the Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness. To take this a little literally, for much of my young adulthood, I wore my dad's old snow boots, not because I was poor, but because they were too well made, even at an old age, not to use. Choosing to buy more, cheaper, clothes is as much an example of consumerism, as anything else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
rayiner 1y ago
Hand-me-downs are great. My youngest has some hand-me-downs he got from his older brother who got them from my neighbor’s son. Your kids don’t need new clothes.

pyth0 1y ago

Could this be due to how low quality many clothes are nowadays and they are simply not lasting long enough to become hand-me-downs?

Workaccount2 1y ago
The fault is firmly with the consumer. People are addicted to cheap shit and consuming like crazy. We had cheap clothes 10 years ago, then Shein and their ilk showed up with even cheaper clothes, and people flocked to them in droves. And you can still buy good quality clothes, $120 shirts and $150 pants of good quality are readily available. But who wouldn't want to have 10 shirts and 5 pants instead?
- quickthrowman 1y ago
  Where can I find good quality (by this I mean durable) shirts for $120 and pants for $150? I’ve examined clothing in that price range and it’s virtually just as bad as $20 fast fashion: synthetic fibers mixed with cotton, poor stitching, loose weave on the fabric, etc. If you have brand names for polo shirts, jeans, and chinos that are durable and long lasting, please share them because I can’t find them. I have yet to place a test order at Bill’s Khakis, I should do that.
  - FireBeyond 1y ago
    So far (only six months in), Normal Brand (https://thenormalbrand.com/ https://thenormalbrand.com/) has been good to me. Seems better quality, nothing I have is synthetics, well stitched.
    - quickthrowman 1y ago
      Thanks, this fits my style and budget, I’ll give this place a shot!
- terribleperson 1y ago
  Can you really get $120 shirts and $150 pants of good quality? J. Crew and Brooks Brothers and the like have gone downhill.
Lu2025 1y ago
This is correct. On average I go through a pair of jeans and a pair of hiking pants a year. 30 years ago I wore my dad's jeans quite a bit as a teenager, I remember even passing a driving test in them.
Cthulhu_ 1y ago
Perhaps, but if clothes are cheap, income is disposable and fashion is fast, why bother? Other than jeans, shoes, socks and underwear, I haven't worn through or grown out of anything in forever, nothing to pass on really. That said, the textile collection and resale industry is huge; stuff gets sorted, parts go to secondhand shops and charity, part gets baled up and exported, parts get recycled, etc. Same with electronics, it ends up in low-wage countries in Africa and south-Asia where there's thousands of people processing it.

ndriscoll 1y ago

That's not impoverished; it's just not wasteful. Half my kids' clothes are from Once Upon A Child, and most of my younger one's are hand-me-downs from the older one. For that matter, I'm wearing 20 year old gym shorts right now.

fn-mote 1y ago

What? It’s the 80s not the 50s. Hand me downs might have been a cultural thing, but “average” people weren’t wearing them out of necessity. I think you’re conflating a culture that did not see everything as disposable with a lack of wealth. The hard stats since I looked them up: Median income increases by 1/3 in inflation adjusted (“real”) dollars from late 80s until 2020. The country is definitely more wealthy. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mepainusa672n https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mepainusa672n

dfxm12 1y ago

This is not evidence for what you are saying. Handing down stuff, including clothes doesn't equate to poverty, sometimes the opposite. Better clothes also last longer. Check out the Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness. To take this a little literally, for much of my young adulthood, I wore my dad's old snow boots, not because I was poor, but because they were too well made, even at an old age, not to use. Choosing to buy more, cheaper, clothes is as much an example of consumerism, as anything else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory

rayiner 1y ago

Hand-me-downs are great. My youngest has some hand-me-downs he got from his older brother who got them from my neighbor’s son. Your kids don’t need new clothes.