Quote

The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind.

I see potential in everything. It's about opening your mind to what you can do to the garment: because they're cheap, you can cut them or stitch them, and if you stuff it up, it's fine - it's only two dollars.

Trade allegedly does not foster growth because when it begins, a flood of imports of factory origin destroys the handicraft manufacturing of the less developed country: the models for this are the effects of British exports of textiles and of iron in India and Chile in the first half of the nineteenth century.

Industry, thrift and self-control are not sought because they create wealth, but because they create character.

Some say the economy means that you have to persuade people to invest in clothes - to buy less things but more expensive things. I disagree - invest in jewelry, or a house, maybe, but not in fashion.

A rise of wages from this cause will, indeed, be invariably accompanied by a rise in the price of commodities; but in such cases, it will be found that labour and all commodities have not varied in regard to each other, and that the variation has been confined to money.

True economy consists in always making the income exceed the out-go. Wear the old clothes a little longer if necessary; dispense with the new pair of gloves; mend the old dress: live on plainer food if need be; so that, under all circumstances, unless some unforeseen accident occurs, there will be a margin in favor of the income.

The exchangeable value of all commodities, rises as the difficulties of their production increase.

Clothes were terribly important in the '20s. They really were an arbiter of who you were and how much money you had: an indicator of social status.

Problems are only opportunities in work clothes.