You can steer where donations go with regulations. I don't see any downsides of warm coats to homeless shelters for example.

▲

jacquesm 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Man it would really make my day if all the homeless people started walking around in Prada and Gucci. That would probably be just thing to kill off these brands for good.

▲

xp84 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

How would we tell if the homeless started wearing Balenciaga though? Most of that trash already looks like it was lifted off the back of a homeless person (and one who is hard on his clothes)!

	▲	jjkaczor 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think this was predicted in that "documentary"... hmmm, Zoolander... with the fashion-line "Derelicte"...

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

blell 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why do you want those brands to die?

▲

jjkaczor 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Why do you want those brands to exist?

Some perspectives would say that they serve no real purpose other than performative wealth display and distribution. They appeal to everyone at fundamental psychological levels to "fit in" with a popular trend or "in group".

Their actual quality is often no better than other manufactured goods. It is their perceived quality and style that are the entire reason their brands exist.

(and... I can admit that certain "luxury brands" are definitely appealing to me personally, even if they make little "logical sense" to own - maybe not clothing so much, but... watches...)

▲

blell 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The opposite of “Why do you want those brands to die?” is not “Why do you want those brands to exist?”.

	▲	ninalanyon 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Perhaps not but in the context of this discussion and legislation it is pertinent question to ask, perhaps not of you specifically but of the wider audience.

▲

digiown 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Brand value particularly for commodity products is usually just a form of information asymmetry between consumers and suppliers, and creates economic inefficiency since it diverts expenditure from other products that can materially improve lives. It also allows enshittification to happen since it creates inertia (brand loyalty) to switching, and the positive brand image sticks around for longer than the actual good quality products.

▲

jjkaczor 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That is a slightly different scenario than taking cheap "fast fashion waste", compressing it into bales, shoving it into shipping containers, transporting/dumping it and flooding local countries/markets.

(And many of these large shipments do not end-up as donations by the time they get to their destination, but are actually sold by weight and then resold again)

But yes - distribution/logistics of donated goods needed to those who need them should be a "solved problem", but unfortunately it is not - regulations could help. (In countries/regions where governments actually WANT to regulate and then subsequently FOLLOW the regulations rather than cancel, ignore or throw them out entirely... Pretty sure everyone knows which country I am referring too...)

	▲	saubeidl 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I would hope that that will also be a policy area the EU addresses as part of this regulatory push.