If you're saying there are equivalent shirts today that are as good but just in different styles and materials, I don't think there are, not at the inflation-adjusted ~$18. $50, and maybe you're getting somewhere. Maybe.
I do get that the specific type I called out might have some functional equivalent that's simply a different style & material but is just as good, but not that cheap, they don't. Under $150, probably, sure. Under $50? No.
This suggests that the cost of clothing has inflated at more like 3x the nominal inflation rate, despite the existence of $18 (or cheaper!) shirts—the inflation was eaten up by worsening quality, rather than showing up in prices, but like for like, even with a generous "functional equivalent" accounting, the change was more like $0.79 -> $50+ than $0.79 -> ~$18—your "equivalent" dollar under the latter calculation in-fact buys less.
You are talking about the hedonic adjustments which is a hugely studied part of inflation calculations. For any way to calculate broad inflation you’ll find products that inflated more than the calculation (and less).
Your own example is an interesting one because a) it’s very hard to compare clothing by objective quality b) you’re changing the goal posts. I’ve found a carhart product that nearly exactly matches your specification and msrp’s for $40. I’ve seen discounters selling it for $25. Which is getting very close to your specific target.
I'm curious what other things when compared for quality would have a higher than 'normal' inflation. Perhaps we've been suffering a higher inflation across many 'dimensions'. If CPI doesn't control for enshitification, we technically have more inflation than we believe
This would still undercount the other hidden part of inflation, which is loss of quality of services. It's sometimes subtle, but once you see it, you'll keep spotting it - the main service itself may not get worse, but everything around it does. Worse seating in the waiting rooms, magazines replaced with first-party ads, worse decor or lack of it, less complimentary items, dark patterns aimed at reducing usage of side offerings without eliminating them, adding complicated online processes, etc.
My pet peeve is automated checkouts and ordering kiosks. These save stores and venues on labor costs by making the customers do the work for the store. For free, and disproportionally wasting customers' time.
(In many cases this applies to self-service in general.)
> My pet peeve is automated checkouts and ordering kiosks. These save stores and venues on labor costs by making the customers do the work for the store. For free, and disproportionally wasting customers' time.
Based on what I’ve heard, it may be wasting time somewhere like Germany where the staff are scanning your items at lightning speed. However, here in Poland self-checkout is where you go to save time. Human-staffed checkouts are and have always been slow like an iceberg. Now and before self-checkout was ever a thing. I was relieved when they were introduced, precisely thanks to the time saved. I hate waiting in queues.
I live in Poland. The experience you attribute to Germany, is what I experienced in Poland. Still experience, on the off chance there's a human behind the register.
All self-checkout machines are moody and lock up if you so much as look at it funny. It would be somewhat acceptable if there was always a dedicated employee delegated solely to assist and unlock the machines, but stores cheap out even on that.
In America it always greatly depended in the store. Wal-mart, for instance, would get the worst workers, and checking out was insufferable. Target was better.
Now, you just need to deal with individual people being slow partially because it’s not their job and partially because it’s a lot less efficient to have a little kiosk vs a conveyer belt. Not to mention if you want to buy something that a store locks up you need to wait for them to go get it. Progress?
