If the same item is being sold, should a larger size cost more money or should all sizes be the same? And Why?
A larger size should cost more money
All the sizes should cost the same
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Should plus size clothing cost more?
Post Opinion
45 Opinion
Like
Share
Follow
2 likes
What is your opinion?
Add Opinion
Most Helpful Opinions
Anonymous
(25-29)
+1 y
I’m 167cm and have a relatively large bust. I’m 48kg and I usually have to get an L or XL to accommodate the chesticles and my height. Most clothing brands here usually only carry S and M, anything larger than that is hard to find. I have to resort to buying men’s t-shirts or spending $70 for a blouse. I don’t think it’s really fair if brands start charging more because I can’t help my stature. I can’t magically make myself an A cup, make myself 155cm and make my waist 20 inches, it’s just not going to happen. I used to run an online fashion store where I sell clothing I sew. I charge every customer the same. That extra 2 or 3 inches of fabric isn’t going to cost me that much more.
If you implement policies you have to look at who they have an effect on beyond the obvious. In the U. S. and in many developed nations, poor people suffer from obesity way more than rich people. Hence you would increase the amount of money poor people have to pay for clothes and further encourage the already large wealth gap in the U. S.. So no, people come in different sizes, lets make it equal for all of us.
True, but rich people don't buy the same clothes as poor people. Not only that but poor people tend to buy more expensive, branded clothes whereas rich people don't. I can confirm this with a high degree of credibility as I work in the private jet industry. Every day I see celebrities and billionaires, and there's not a Gucci belt or a pair of Yeezys anywhere 😂 So if some poorer people were to stop spending money on designers and instead spend their money on healthier food/exercise programmes then it wouldn't be so much of a problem 😉
There might be some with status symbols, but that's not the norm. Many poor people don't have time and/or money to invest into health and fitness. If you work 2 jobs a day and still don't even make minimum wage and live in a food desert, it's not laziness or lack of will that prevents you from being healthy, it's the social structure around you. Poor and fat people just being lazy is such an outdated myth. And in addition, this doesn't take into account the array of fat disorders that they are discovering now, like lipedema, which apparently 11% of all women have, for which there is no easily affordable treatment for. So if the government started to invest more in its poor population rather than letting a few rich people accumulate all the wealth, if the government worked against obesogenic environments, and if we started respecting overweight people and looked at the real causes for obesity rather than going with the fat and lazy dogma, we could actually address the problem.
We can speak of items becoming expensive when it's merely about objects but this has to do with people and how they may be affected by this. Are we saying that the smaller size should be cheaper? I just think price it all the same there's no valid point in this because then all of a sudden each size would have to have a specific price which is just creating more difference and segregation.
It's like if there's a big person and a small person and they're both buying bread. Would the smaller person pay less and the big person pay more just because of their size? No. It'd mean we must also pay more the bigger size a shoe is
Well I can understand why you might think that, but the bread analogy isn't really the same thing. In your analogy, if the two people eat the same amount of bread, then it would cost the same, sure. But if you are looking how much it costs to stop them being hungry, then the larger person (with the larger stomach size) will require more bread to stop being hungry, resulting in a higher price. It's the same with the Clothes, for larger people the items cost more as it uses more material. Do you see my point?
Well it costs a company x amount to produce a small t shirt... For a larger t shirt, it would require more material, which means that it costs the company more than x to produce. This difference in production cost is then passed onto the consumer.
In theory, if you were charging on cost per square foot of material, you could charge more for more material used. The labour cost would be the same, more or less. I think though that the cost increase would be so minor that the extra revenue wouldn't be worth it considering the loss of business you'd risk by implementing such a pricing structure.
a smaller size may use less fabric but the biggest production cost is the stitching and cutting which will be about the same so maybe smaller clothes do cost a few pennies less to produce but overall by the time they are hanging on the rail they all have the same profit margin
Well, typically the way most clothing retail stores operate is they buy clothes from Bangladesh and mark the price up 25,000% and sell it to complete fucking idiots, so I guess it really doesn't matter what they charge for clothes.
Somebody somewhere will always be stupid enough to pay.
It should be proportional to the difference in cost it takes to make the piece of clothing. Like for a t shirt, they should be similar in price, but frilly and fancy dresses should have a higher price gap in my opinion.
More materials cost more money so yes. If im making an omlet for a five year old and an omlet for andre the giant one is going to cost more than the other so they dont have the same price tag.
@billiamthekid People would eventually stop spending that money on that brand if they were to be biased and raise the prices for a certain body type so that would lead to money loss instead.
Okay but that about a companys choice and mabye it would be bad for them but then again if their product is expensive leather it would probably be worth it
Most clothes are the same price, regardless of size until you get into plus sizes or big and tall clothing. Maybe you just don't shop in those places. I have abnormally long arms and have had to pay extra for clothes most of my life. Personally I think they should be the same price, as the markup on clothing is incredible so don't cry about a few extra inches of dirt cheap fabric in some 3rd world sweatshop. Besides they don't charge less for an xs do they?
I tend to shop in places where the sizes range from 6 to 20, all are the same price. Same for men's clothes where I shop, the same items are the same price regardless of size. If you have to get special clothing then it will be more expensive but otherwise I've never noticed.
Most clothing companies have differing measurement requirements for their sizes. I bought one pair of pants from one manufacturer, and another from another manufacturer of the same listed measurement and they were not the same size
Most do however kids clothing requires more expensive techniques to produce as they are smaller, also they have greater safety regulations to be hypoellergenic
Most Helpful Opinions