1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Esquire's Salary Based Suit Buying Guide

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Joffrey, Sep 25, 2012.

  1. Spaghettimatt

    Spaghettimatt Senior member

    Messages:
    1,118
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    

    Dumb, racist statement is dumb and racist.
     
  2. Layered Player

    Layered Player Senior member

    Messages:
    375
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    How is a recitation of history racist?

    PC is going to kill this country.
     
  3. Blackhood

    Blackhood Senior member

    Messages:
    2,904
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Because while Asian culture is "only" 3,000 years old, western culture was reset during the dark ages. We had to start again nearly from scratch while they learned and advanced continuously all the time.
     
  4. Spaghettimatt

    Spaghettimatt Senior member

    Messages:
    1,118
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    

    "Recitations" of history are not unladen with value judgments and "primitive" by Western European (read: white) standards is one of them.

    Also, there is now broad scholarly consensus that the "caucasian race" hypothesis of ancient Egypt is false. Actually, I'm pretty sure that's eugenics era nonsense.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
  5. Layered Player

    Layered Player Senior member

    Messages:
    375
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Location:
    Elsewhere

    Would you consider Greeks to be Caucasian? I thought that the ruling classes in Egypt were Greek, granted it's been awhile since I cracked a history tome.
     
  6. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member Admin Moderator

    Messages:
    33,465
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    

    This is a lot of implied value judgements here. Compared to every other country in the developed world, expenditure on clothing and accessories is extremely low in this country. As I stated before, Italian men spend 15% of gross on clothing and accessories. This is high, but compare that to the 7% spent on average, including men and women, in the USA. Your ball park of 3% of gross for American men is probably fairly accurate. This means, given a $50K income, that that man will spend $1500 in clothing, a year. That's just over $100 a month. That is nothing, even at mass market prices. You simply cannot dress yourself well at that budget unless you are a sports shopper, and I'm willing to bet $100 that people who spend 2-3% of their gross on clothing are probably not sport shoppers.
     
  7. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member Admin Moderator

    Messages:
    33,465
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    

    You missed the point completely. The point is that accidents of history led to different consumer values, and that their should be no moral value attached to consumer values, in general.
     
  8. mcbrown

    mcbrown Senior member

    Messages:
    727
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    

    I would consider the people of Caucasus to be Caucasian:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_of_the_Caucasus

    The popular (mis)use of the word Caucasian arose from 18th century racist nonsense, though it has managed to stick:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race#Origin_of_the_concept

    Some of the notions expressed here about the history of civilizations are shockingly devoid of factual basis. If only there were a networked array of computers on which one could search for information before opening one's mouth...
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
  9. The Thin Man

    The Thin Man Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    

    Not to blow your mind, but you can look at the BLS statistics in this pdf: http://www.bls.gov/cex/2011/Standard/age.pdf.

    American men 16 or older spend an average of $324 annually on apparel, of a household average of $1,740. If you consider that some of that will be 16- and 17-year-old children, the true average must be under $300.
     
  10. The Thin Man

    The Thin Man Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    There's other interesting facts in the Consumer Expenditure Survey charts. The average apparel spending for 16+ men in households with more than $150,000 in income is $742 (this doesn't count footwear and "other apparel products services, which includes material for making clothes, shoe repair, alterations and repairs, sewing patterns and notions, clothing rental, clothing storage, dry cleaning and sent-out laundry, watches, jewelry, and repairs to watches and jewelry.")

    Keep in mind, this chart includes voxsartoria and RSS.

    Source: http://www.bls.gov/cex/2011/Standard/higherincome.pdf
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
  11. Layered Player

    Layered Player Senior member

    Messages:
    375
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Like maybe teh Googles?

    As I said I havent really paid much attention since college owing to more pressing matters, i.e. staying alive.

    I knew about the Caucasus as an entity but not the misuse of the word as a blanket term for us palefaces; my bad, thanks for setting me straight however snarkily.

    That being said I'd like to apologize to the threak for my part in it's derailment and offer my opinion to help get it back on track.

    I can afford to spend what Esquire says I should but never will...far superior can be had for less allowing me to spend more on wine and cigars.
     
  12. The Thin Man

    The Thin Man Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    In households where the "reference person" (similar to head of household) is a manager or professional, the average spending on men's apparel is $428; a technical, sales or clerical worker, $324; service worker, $310; construction worker or mechanic, $249; operator, fabricator or laborer, $293; and retired, $227.
    Source: http://www.bls.gov/cex/2011/Standard/occup.pdf
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
  13. VinnyMac

    VinnyMac Senior member

    Messages:
    1,868
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    That sounds more realistic. Where'd you get those numbers from? Chances are, the "average male reference person" doesn't read Esquire. Heck, I don't read Esquire.
     
  14. Layered Player

    Layered Player Senior member

    Messages:
    375
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Agree.

    Just from memory I'd say I've spent about 6-700 this year but didn't make any "major" purchases.
     
  15. The Thin Man

    The Thin Man Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    I would say that it would be silly to compare men who are interested in clothes to the average man. This is a country where Wal-Mart's apparel revenue is more than 10 times Polo Ralph Lauren's.

    That being said, you have to be well short of Marc Grayson territory before you must admit you have a clothes-spending addiction. http://www.dandyism.net/2006/12/12/fop-culture/
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
  16. MrBluto

    MrBluto Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    What I wrote was just in reply to the previous poster talking about the "thousands" of years of Chinese history so I put that in perspective.
    I expected the knee jerk response and name ccalling from the ignorant brain washed kids here. They can't help it because they've been brainwashed and conditioned from birth to behave in a pc approved manner. Anyone born after the late 70's will never be able to think on their own no matter how free they think they are. The reason is that they've all been exposed to the telescreens since birth and for hours a day. Staring at a TV or monitor, or some dopey iphone for hours a day, or even having one on in the room, has been shown to stunt the developing brain to the point where you will never be normal for the remainder of your life and will always be naive and gullible and open to suggestion to any crackpot pushing some bs version of "history";or anything else. Once your brain is fully developed in your mid 20's staring at screens has less of an effect.
    The boomers had TV but only watched a show and then turned it off;TV didn't broadcast 24 hrs a day;cable didn't exist.
    Looks like we're going to have to raise GenZ without this junk and in a quiet peaceful environment condusive to thinking.
    Gen X and Y can be used for the grunt prole menial work like cleaning up or confined to some cubicle slaving over accountant junk.
     
  17. chogall

    chogall Senior member

    Messages:
    6,564
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    Well, not sure what you've been smoking, but permanent income tax/16th amendment did not happen until 1913 and world war 1 started 1914, so pretty sure there's no income tax in the pre-war era so upper class people could afford to spend more on clothing and accessories.

    p.s., stay in ce forum kthx.
     
  18. JLibourel

    JLibourel Senior member

    Messages:
    8,602
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    

    The Greco-Macedonians ruled Egypt only for a small fraction of its long history--from the conquest by Alexander in 332 B.C. to the conquest by the Romans under Octavian in 30 B.C. The ruling dynasty was Macedonian.

    The native Egyptians were a racially mixed people, comprised of Caucasoid (Berber and Semitic) elements and Negroid. Negroid features can be seen on quite a few busts and statues. While many may scoff at the claims of certain African-American thinkers that their race were thus the creators of all civilization, I can recall one making the very cogent argument that since Americans have always classified anyone with any discernible sub-Saharan African ancestry as "colored," "Negro," "Black" or "African-American" or whatever the term de jour is, then by that definition, the ancient Egyptians were "Negroes" (more or less). Nonetheless, the ancient Egyptians regarded themselves as distinct from and rather looked down on the darker peoples to the south.

    "Caucasoid" is the proper term for the race. It derives from 18th century theories that the Caucasus was the birthplace of the race. It should be pointed out that "Caucasoid" is by no means a synonym for "white." The Dravidian people of southern India are very dark, yet they are Caucasoid, as are some of the Aryan peoples like the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka.

    My apologies for using certain terminology that may be somewhat archaic. There is certainly no intention to offend, but sometimes I just don't know of a better term than, say, "Negroid."
     
  19. Layered Player

    Layered Player Senior member

    Messages:
    375
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Location:
    Elsewhere
     
  20. chogall

    chogall Senior member

    Messages:
    6,564
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    afaik, ancient egyptians are of the semitic branch of the caucasian/indo-european/aryan race.

    but then in 'merica 'caucasian' generally refers to white people, whatever that means, since its not defined by skin color or racial origin.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by