this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
423 points (99.3% liked)
Europe
8485 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐ฉ๐ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The article says it's aimed at fast fashion, so luxury brands are almost certainly exempt.
That would depend on the specific wording but if they define minimum standards and the 'luxury brands' already fulfill those then I don't see the problem.
How else would they exempt them? Even the most corrupt lawmakers don't just write brand names into their legislation.
Luxury brands usually produce in the same places as fast fashion, the only difference is their margin when selling. If you want it sustainable and with fair working conditions, it's also cost about the same, but you'd have to look for it (and probably will only find a few products of luxury brands)
That's why I have my own definition if "luxury": Sustainable materials, humane working conditions, timeless style, long lasting construction etc.
I have to look for it, especially since I buy second hand, but not very often because of, well, whatever I buy is timeless and long lasting. No need for frequent replacement.