I read it as well late last night, I assumed it was part of Secondhand September as they've had a few articles in similar vein about lengthening the life of garments. Just did a quick reread, in the comments there was an interesting quote by Thoreau Walden pretty much complaining about the decline of quality in the 19th century, sounding very similar.
This is a bit I kind of miss in the whole demonisation of fast fashion, as if it's something new. No, there's always been poor quality clothes, they just tend not to survive for obvious reasons.
It's the rate of consumption of cheap goods that's the issue that's new and the definition of fast fashion, not necessarily the specific shops and quality of make (obviously they contribute and enable it).
They do tend to be a crappy compromise of affordability but presentable clothes. Going through those comments it's, as always, an odd mix of entitlement of expecting great quality at low cost without acknowledging that it means terrible social welfare of the workers.
Then, there also tends to be a bit of snobbishness towards those at the bottom of the social economic ladder for being so foolish for not just buying one good expensive item, as if that's realistic. I always get the sense some are aggrieved the poor don't actually wear their economic status on their literal sleeves like they used to.