To think £100 a month should be enough for clothes?

[SabineUndine]

I don't have to wear formal suits for work, so I'm always in smart casual, with emphasis on the casual. But £100 doesn't seem to go that far. What do you spend (inc shoes)?

Stuff lasts if not worn/washed all the time. I have outfits 20 - 30 years' old which still look good because not constantly worn. Also an incentive to try and stay the same size! Build up a flexible wardrobe and in theory all you need ever buy again are socks and underwear.

art that's about right for suits. DHs clothes buying has its own line in the budget. He is 6'4" and 300lb these days. Good tailoring is vital until he wires his mouth shut to lose the weight (sorry he is away and it's very noticeable how much less is being eaten).

But don't the clothes look dated now if you have had them so long? I know style is revamped periodically but a 60s style - or whatever - garment on sale now has been updated for the present.

I don't buy stuff that is in extremes of fashion. Actually I remember reading an article a while ago (in the Guardian I think) that was saying most people don't. We tend to stick with things that will not date quickly, and it's well cut trousers or skirts, shirts, tshirts etc.

Good point about style... I have trousers that DS17yo wore that look odd now when DS12yo wears them (closer to flares than skinnies!). Luckily DS12yo isn't fussy, but the style difference in just 5 yrs is very obvious.

ps: there weren't any skinny trousers in Sainsbury's 5-6 yrs ago, it's not like I had much choice in style for age 11-12, and that's a safe conservative shop.

alexa is amazing how quickly trends come round.

I have a lovely fake leopard coat. I got it from Primark on sale at £20.
I will wear leopard print any time of day or year, I am not bothered if its in trend or not.
I only got it three years ago and leopard is all over the place again.

People always assume its vintage because of the cut and colour.

There is nothing new in fashion. You can put a pair of boot leg jeans away for a couple of years because they feel horribly dated and be fishing them out again because they are just what you need to freshen up your wardrobe (bluegh, writing like a third rate women's columnist there!)

There are 'fads' that will always look out of style after a short while. Gangnam teeshirts and skirt over trousers all-in-ones spring to mind.

But 'looks' come back soon enough.

I just updated my winter work wear wardrobe with 12 items at 5 pounds each at eveything5pounds.com. It's mostly high st end of lines and so on though quality can be variable. The shoes are amazing I will say and at this point about 75% of my clothes are from there.

It also helps offset any guilt (and cost) when you're presented with a £75 must-have, or a Reiss coat or something.

It's my favourite clothes website.

One of my most treasured items is a black cashmere coat bought second hand in Rokit about 10 years ago. It is early 60's and is simply a beautifully elegant knee length coat.

I would never pretend my clothes buying is necessary. It's a lifelong hobby. When I was young and vintage was cheap, I used to hunt down early twentieth century clothing and I have now a beautiful collection, from Edwardian through to the 1950s. It gives me as much pleasure as my books and, if I ever hit hard times, It's probably worth a fair bit too.

There are some very censorious attitudes on this thread. I'm not talking about people who can't afford it, I mean the posts about how wasteful and vacuous it is. My husband, as I think I've said, spends at least as much on cameras and on art as I do on clothes. He'd be the first to agree it's unnecessary and yet no-one ever accuses him of being wasteful.

Probably between £4,000 and £5,000 a year that's for 7 of us.School uniform and school shoes,trainers,pe kit and football boots probably cost me about £1,200 every year.

Clothes and shoes wise I buy from charity shops,Primark,New Look,Topman,Dorothy Perkins,Sports shops,Debenhams,M&S,ebay and I usually pick up a few bits from the supermarkets throughout the year.

As long as you can afford it,which we can and your not dumping stuff that could be re used(we don't it goes to charity shops)then I can't see what the harm is!

In world where Ferdinand Marcos is being rehabilitated as a national hero & nobody cares any more about Imelda's 1200 pairs of expensive shoes (in a country where political corruption was rife & many people lived in awful shantytowns)... I would welcome a more thought about how folk spend their money. Censorious is not all bad.

Ok but I notice you're not censuring my husband for his profligate spending on art.

lol, that sounds like a challenge to be bellicose!

Art is a lousy investment, actually. Has no functional purpose -- at least we actually need to wear clothes. We interact with clothes constantly while we wear them, too. After the first few days, how often do you even really look at it or admire art?

Does your husband really need a camera with 2 more MPixels? How much more cleverly could he spend his money?

Each person needs to figure out the balance of luxury vs. mindful or charitable spending for themselves, I don't want to set any rules for others, but I do agree with principle that we should all think about how to spend our money wisely.

I've got 4 paintings I own, the largest of which is an original canvas that cost 2.5k and is about 5 feet by 5 feet.

I look at it every day, and I love it. It was bought on a big birthday of my partners, on a very lovely city break we did on the cheap, purchased with part of an old redundancy payment I had in savings. I love it both for the beauty of it and for the memories.

It's my favourite thing I own, that I bought with my own money, and I couldn't give a shit what anyone else thinks.

Floisme I would kill to get into your wardrobe and have a look! Are they all very tiny, as they're so old? Can you wear them? I once had a 20s cloche hat which I still miss.

Yes but my point is - no-one ever does say that too him His hobby is acceptable and tasteful yet mine is regarded as wasteful (not by him, I should add - he totally gets it).

And you're right, my vintage clothing collection is probably worth more than his art and cameras. But neither of us do what we do as an investment; we do it because it gives us pleasure. I'm just interested in the polar attitudes that people have towards our hobbies.

It's absolutely because fashion and clothing is coded as a female and thus lesser pastime. It's shallow, vacuous, wasteful etc - sexist rhetoric.

How you spend your discretionary spending is entirely up to you, end of.

pandarific They're not all tiny as I used to just buy things I liked, irrespective of size. I still wear some of them e.g. the coats, jackets, jewellry but a lot of it either doesn't fit, doesn't suit me any more or is just too fragile. I am getting to the point of wondering what to do with some of it - if I had a daughter, I'd just pass it on but my son isn't interested! If my pension doesn't go tits up and I don't need to sell, I'll probably see if a costume museum is interested.

LLJKK if that was aimed at me I've just this morning found out that my Uncle has died and I've come on here for a bit of light relief because he's the 4 close member of my family that I've lost in close succession of one another so I really couldn't give a toss about what you think!

If it wasn't aimed at me then I apologise!

FloismeI think your collection sounds amazing and is just as important as a piece of art work that would have been made within the same era,the clothes show us and tell us so much about the people of the time and it's something tangible that you can feel and hold.

I for one would love to see some of your pieces I bet they're amazing and I think it's great that you can still wear some of them!

Wow, that's a lot of money. That would do my family for more than a month of clothes (including all shoes).

Going back to the Marcos's, isn't it interesting that whenever we hear that name, our first thought isn't the art collection or the palaces or the private planes or the whole industries he annexed or the international aid he stole? No, it's the shoes. Always the shoes.

ohtheholidays

Agree totally that if you love clothes and have the money it's not intrinsically wasteful to spend money on them. Expensive clothes much likelier to have good supply chains.

I spent a little while working out what I'd spent on my total work wardrobe a few days ago. This is everything I ever wear to work through the week including pants, bras and shoes, all my work tops and trousers and my one dress, and it worked out at £132 in total which I have spent over some years. But I am sure anyone with any fashion sense would do almost anything other than look like me; there are restrictions on what I can wear at work; I walk, reach and stand a lot so must wear comfortable flat shoes and long length clothes; I love charity shops and clothes swaps, thereby trashing the high street economy.

Spending money on shoes when the money is a. Looted from the country you're entrusted to run or b. Meaning your kids go without, is wrong

Spending discretionary income which you can well afford on shoes/clothes/art is absolutely totally and completely fine.

I've just spent 200 quid on a pile of really nice yarn and some Liberty fabric - I shall have many hours of pleasure from using them. Its my money, which I work hard for and pay taxes on at point of receipt and when buying (from a small British yarn producer.)
If I looked nice in clothes I'd probably spend more on them too.