Hacker News Reader

Comment by dbul | Hacker News Reader

The focus seems to be on pricing, and understandably so considering the nature of people. The implied ethics behind the manufacturing is something I appreciate: I've bought clothing from only countries with better than not labor laws for the past several years. Recently, Burberry has retired their UK-made products in favor of more dubious manufacturing locations; so I've stopped buying Burberry.

I hope this becomes a mainstream designer brand. American Apparel had their own target audience. But I just couldn't understand why no one was able to develop aesthetically pleasing clothing made in the US on par with other designers you may find in Saks.

View on HN

> I've bought clothing from only countries with better than not labor laws for the past several years.

This has the effect of giving employees who already make, say, $100 / day more options as to where to work, while refusing to give those who make $10/day (or $1/day) workers oversees choices like this.

I find this effect to be stunningly at odds with most of the stated political goals that usually correlate with this opinion.

If redistribution from the $100/day person to the $50/day person is good, why is redistributing employment options from a $10/day person to a $100/day person a good thing?

In theory, I absolutely agree; however, in reality I disagree unless you can show some data that indicates money being spent this way is more ethical than inhibition. Considering the competition for apparel, ample supply of workers, and what actually goes on in factories, if I have the option I will buy from a place that is more likely to uphold human rights.

If you would like a glimpse into my position and haven't already watched the PBS documentary China Blue, I recommend it.

I think there are opportunities for a company to do an incredible amount of good in other countries as well, like we hope to do locally. But at our stage, we don't have the leverage to vet or monitor contractors in a way we'd find acceptable. We aspire someday to make our apparel available outside the United States with manufacturing in the respective areas! We don't think transporting inputs/outputs across the globe multiple times is fair to our environment.

And probably making some 50$/day workers be able to become 100$/workers and helping those with whom you at least have some cultural connection and also just because you also care for your country and why not, letting some jobless youngster start a career in the USA. And not promoting what is akin to slavery in states about whose workmen we have no clue.

Two complementary things can be good at the same time. Giving money to a beggar and not giving to another can both be good for the same person.

dbul, we definitely agree! Almost every brand in our closets is manufactured outside the United States. Companies like Patagonia are leading the way in striving for local manufacturing at scale, but there it is difficult with the traditional retail model, given most companies margins. This is where we think being online-only will really help.

Please reach out at william [at] fromholden.com and stay in touch. We want your ideas on what you'd like us to design!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com