I get it, I just don't agree with you, which seems to be a really difficult concept for you to grasp across your responses on this thread.
Yes, most people do need a car – but you don't need a car from a manufacturer that produces ethically dubious lines. Other cars are available.
Most people need a bag – but you don't need a bag from a manufacturer that produces ethically dubious lines. Other bags are available.
People need food – but they don't need food from manufacturers that produce ethically dubious lines. Other foods are available.
So, why question stands – why single out Hermes?
Right, right – because you don't think they are worth the money and you think it's status signalling. Yet when you challenged on that point with the comparison to other luxury items of similar value but not luxury fashion, you go back to ethical controversy – and thus we are stuck in a never-ending loop.
As many food consumers are aware of the ethical controversy of palm oil as luxury brand consumers are aware of the ethical controversy around exotic leather production – even more I would wager. Greenpeace's Ran-Tan campaign starring Emma Thompson? Chester Zoo sustainability campaign? WWF? David Attenborough?
Exotic leathers actually make up less than 4% of their handbags alone – let alone when you account for their entire clothing, jewellery and shoe lines. Not in your face whatsoever.