If you're reading this and you're a regular Mario's shopper, know this: you are a useless drain on society and I hate you.

Even if it's half off, you're still talking about a $200 shirt, if you're a guy. If you buy a $200 shirt, you're a useless drain on society and I hate you.

I feel your pain Commenty, but paying $50, $20, $10, or $5 for a shirt that's made with outsourced production isn't helping either.

It's the ones plunking down $200 for outsourced shirts that are the real problem. General rule: production where it's designed or GTFO.

I don't understand. Last time I checked, there were sweatshops and other bad "worker issues" in Italy, the United States, etc. as well.

@ geyser It's not just a sweatshop issue. The US' diminished capacity as a manufacturing power has put us in a bad spot globally, garment manufacture just being one example. It's loss of jobs in your country/community, devaluation of skills and goods, the environmental impact of transport, and so on. Plus it's kinda insulting for a brand to cheap out on labor costs but expect you to still pay premium prices, even more so if it's a brand that capitalizes on marketing itself as American, Italian, French, etc.

That makes sense. My own problem with choosing clothing, aside from finding it very difficult to find out (or even guess) about labor practices due to lack of transparency, is that even very expensive clothing can very often be extremely shoddy quality, no matter where it's made. So I've tended to get most things second-hand. But enough about me!

Like the noble ground hog, this comment thread has made me go back into my fashion hidey hole for another year.

Which reminds me of a great tweet I read yesterday:

"I'm sorry, so very, very sorry Punxsutawney Phil. But you have two shadows."

Every time some Merc columnist writes about a SBSunday sale, a nacho-eatin, beer guzzlin fairy loses her wings.

Just sayin. If you don't like the concept, don't give it a 50-ft electronic billboard.

Thanks Marjorie, I see your points about the economics of the situation. In other areas of my life, I like to consider my purchases by similar principles, and I'm willing to pay a little extra for my principles*. It's true I should do the same for clothing, and that I basically don't, at present.

My basic point though is just that there has to be a cost level for all types of clothing that is too high, and the purchaser who pays above that should be presumed an asshole until proven otherwise. So there's a different ceiling price for each kind of clothing, but whatever it is, the menswear at Mario's exceeds it in every example I know of.

At any rate, I certainly don't think Mario's pretends that it deserves higher prices because of their contribution to any sort of laudable goal - it's just pure conspicuous consumption for people with more cash and vanity.

* It's true that the answer to "What's the best practice, taking everything into account?" is almost always complicated and crazy-making. That doesn't mean it isn't worth considering carefully.

@The Showstopper Just responding in kind to stereotyping. The original Mario's is at 833 SW Broadway (like RIGHT by Pioneer Square), but they also have a location in Seattle and one out in the godforsaken BridgePort Village.

I know because I have BEEN to BP Village and I was raised Catholic. Also, AGREE re: Super Mario's. Talk about a missed opportunity.

@Marjorie, this thing is erry year.