6 ms·

This is from 140 years ago but feel very modern "The manufacturers have lost their bearings and know not which way to turn. They can no longer find the raw mat

This is from 140 years ago but feel very modern "The manufacturers have lost their bearings and know not which way to turn. They can no longer find the raw material to satisfy the lawless depraved passion of their laborers for work. In our woolen districts dirty and half rotten rags are raveled out to use in making certain cloths sold under the name of renaissance, which have about the same durability as the promises made to voters. At Lyons, instead of leaving the silk fiber in its natural simplicity and suppleness, it is loaded down with mineral salts, which while increasing its weight, make it friable and far from durable. All our products are adulterated to aid in their sale and shorten their life. Our epoch will be called the “Age of adulteration” just as the first epochs of humanity received the names of “The Age of Stone”, “The Age of Bronze”, from the character of their production"

eternityforest 4y ago
On the other had, we are a lot better at making things out of cheap materials. Clothes from Target are relatively durable considering the price, especially if you do basic repairs like they would have back then. Even the food is probably better now. It's not perfect, but modern products are pretty amazing. A shirt can sell for $2 and last 20 years in some cases. Of course sweatshops and pollution are still awful.
- Broken_Hippo 4y ago
  Sure, clothes from Target might be relatively durable considering the price. But you need more clothing now. In a lot of places, it is socially unacceptable to wear the same thing for days in a row, even if you change your undergarments. You also don't have a realistic choice to make your own clothing. Cloth, thread, buttons and zippers aren't cheap and it became more out of reach in the late 80s and through the 90's (my mother sews and has for decades). That's not even considering things like a sewing machine, fabric scissors, and the fact that you might look like your clothes are homemade (which doesn't always fare well). Your Target clothing also won't be usable when it is worn, so you can't piece it together to make a new garment or even a blanket even if the stretchy material was easier to work with. You really can't do basic repairs like they used to do. I'm not sure this is cheaper.
  - eternityforest 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure it is cheaper, but it might not be cheaper for people who wear nicer clothes regularly, or people who are really into sneakers. Apparently the average is $300 a year for an average man, but it's possible to spend much less.
  - shanebellone 4y ago
    I wear the same jeans almost every day. Move past social convention.
    - kqr 4y ago
      As long as it's a uniform, muted colour and you don't get it stained, nobody will know if you're wearing the same pants or shirts every day.
      - shanebellone 4y ago
        Levi's 1954 501z. Quality denim doesn't require regular washing. In another life, I did wear a uniform so these things might be linked.
        canadianfella 4y ago
  - mcBesse 4y ago
    > In a lot of places, it is socially unacceptable to wear the same thing for days in a row This piques my curiosity as it's definitely not the case where I live. Can I ask what sorts of places?
    - luckylion 4y ago
      I've heard similar things from women who worked in majority-women offices in e.g. HR. They were expected to steadily rotate, even wearing the same vest over other stuff two days in a row would result in questions "where they had slept last night" from their co-workers.
slim 4y ago
The age of obsolescence
cjfd 4y ago
A very good thing to read to realize that when one hears this kind of complaining today there is nothing new in it and it is not a signal of the apocalypse coming or of a unique new age. Well, the apocalypse or a new age might be coming, but this is not an indication that it is. It always was the case that one should pay attention to from whom one is buying.
- IndySun 4y ago
  cjfd... >when one hears this kind of complaining today... What complaining, and what kind of complaining is it?
  - thfuran 4y ago
    Did you read the comment that they replied to?
    - IndySun 4y ago
      >thfuran Yes, I believe I did read the correct comment that they replied to. However, here, it is not always possible to be 100% certain to whom or from whom one is replying to or from and/or which specific comment in any given paragraph is being referenced (unless specified/re-quoted) - hence my quote and question. And I am very open to being corrected. Thank you.
- pdimitar 4y ago
  It's also an indication that the corporate squeezes that are being done on people are nothing new as well and they are just as problematic today as they were 140 years ago. So yeah, perspective. Your take seems to defend companies, my take wants people to have more leisure time. Guess you already picked your poison.
kergonath 4y ago
> This is from 140 years ago but feel very modern The world has not changed that much since then. We are still the same apes and are still motivated by the same things (getting food, status, power, or accomplishment, in various orders of priority depending on your social position).
nick889996544 4y ago
"the lawless depraved passion of their laborers for work"... what in the f**?
checkyoursudo 4y ago
In a similar vein, every once in a while I feel like the Luddites were onto something.

eternityforest 4y ago

On the other had, we are a lot better at making things out of cheap materials. Clothes from Target are relatively durable considering the price, especially if you do basic repairs like they would have back then. Even the food is probably better now. It's not perfect, but modern products are pretty amazing. A shirt can sell for $2 and last 20 years in some cases. Of course sweatshops and pollution are still awful.

Broken_Hippo 4y ago
Sure, clothes from Target might be relatively durable considering the price. But you need more clothing now. In a lot of places, it is socially unacceptable to wear the same thing for days in a row, even if you change your undergarments. You also don't have a realistic choice to make your own clothing. Cloth, thread, buttons and zippers aren't cheap and it became more out of reach in the late 80s and through the 90's (my mother sews and has for decades). That's not even considering things like a sewing machine, fabric scissors, and the fact that you might look like your clothes are homemade (which doesn't always fare well). Your Target clothing also won't be usable when it is worn, so you can't piece it together to make a new garment or even a blanket even if the stretchy material was easier to work with. You really can't do basic repairs like they used to do. I'm not sure this is cheaper.
- eternityforest 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure it is cheaper, but it might not be cheaper for people who wear nicer clothes regularly, or people who are really into sneakers. Apparently the average is $300 a year for an average man, but it's possible to spend much less.
- shanebellone 4y ago
  I wear the same jeans almost every day. Move past social convention.
  - kqr 4y ago
    As long as it's a uniform, muted colour and you don't get it stained, nobody will know if you're wearing the same pants or shirts every day.
    - shanebellone 4y ago
      Levi's 1954 501z. Quality denim doesn't require regular washing. In another life, I did wear a uniform so these things might be linked.
      - canadianfella 4y ago
- mcBesse 4y ago
  > In a lot of places, it is socially unacceptable to wear the same thing for days in a row This piques my curiosity as it's definitely not the case where I live. Can I ask what sorts of places?
  - luckylion 4y ago
    I've heard similar things from women who worked in majority-women offices in e.g. HR. They were expected to steadily rotate, even wearing the same vest over other stuff two days in a row would result in questions "where they had slept last night" from their co-workers.

slim 4y ago

The age of obsolescence

cjfd 4y ago

A very good thing to read to realize that when one hears this kind of complaining today there is nothing new in it and it is not a signal of the apocalypse coming or of a unique new age. Well, the apocalypse or a new age might be coming, but this is not an indication that it is. It always was the case that one should pay attention to from whom one is buying.

IndySun 4y ago
cjfd... >when one hears this kind of complaining today... What complaining, and what kind of complaining is it?
- thfuran 4y ago
  Did you read the comment that they replied to?
  - IndySun 4y ago
    >thfuran Yes, I believe I did read the correct comment that they replied to. However, here, it is not always possible to be 100% certain to whom or from whom one is replying to or from and/or which specific comment in any given paragraph is being referenced (unless specified/re-quoted) - hence my quote and question. And I am very open to being corrected. Thank you.
pdimitar 4y ago
It's also an indication that the corporate squeezes that are being done on people are nothing new as well and they are just as problematic today as they were 140 years ago. So yeah, perspective. Your take seems to defend companies, my take wants people to have more leisure time. Guess you already picked your poison.

kergonath 4y ago

> This is from 140 years ago but feel very modern The world has not changed that much since then. We are still the same apes and are still motivated by the same things (getting food, status, power, or accomplishment, in various orders of priority depending on your social position).

nick889996544 4y ago

"the lawless depraved passion of their laborers for work"... what in the f**?

checkyoursudo 4y ago

In a similar vein, every once in a while I feel like the Luddites were onto something.