Do try to not sound so supercilious. It's not very becoming.
Those Mums and Dads will be the ones working their arses off in jobs where they are threatened with not passing probation or getting further hours (if they can even get through the interview process) because their 'standards of professional dress' aren't up to scratch - if you do not have a couple of hundred pounds knocking around or the time, exactly standard physique and the sheer luck to happen upon an entire interview outfit made from those heavily fetishized natural materials, crafted by the exotified people in the advertising blurb (and they don't see that much more of the money, the profit goes to the rich white people that own the brand), you just don't have it. But you might be able to get something that looks smart enough from the cheaper end of the market.
People need clothes, whatever their income level. They need to be warm - if it's a handknitted wool jumper that costs over £100 or nothing because you personally can afford it, then they get to be cold whilst you sit snug and warm. Or they can not be as cold waiting for the bus home after work with a £12 synthetic jumper over their £7 shirt and £2 vest. Or actually owning a £22 coat rather than being wet and told they look scruffy.
I'm not even going into the emotional aspects of growing up or working, trying to scrape a living being told you look like a tramp or seeing others more financially secure being given more chances because they appear to be made in the same image as those in power - clothing is a pure and simple physical need. It enables them to access opportunities for increasing income. Affordable clothing removes barriers to employment and progression.
Surely, if you're in the ethical identity group, you should be in favour of removing barriers - or is this just about finding another way of feeling superior over people poorer than you?