That's such a ridiculously oversimplified take on how the modern economy/clothing industry works it's almost childish. Markets aren't magic, and there are lots of reasons customers wouldn't get what they want.
Not to mention, my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want - you should try it sometime. With that in mind, even if you want to hold on to your weird market utopia fantasy, it certainly seems like there must be a sizeable minority of people who want (and, anecdotally, who DO go out of their way to find when possible) pants with functional pockets.
"That's what the market sells so it's what you must want" is such a wild take.
> my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want
That is even more childish though, we know for sure that people don't really know what they want. What is available is a much better predictor for what people want than what they say they want.
Peoples opinions are a valuable input, but it isn't the most important. Expert decisions that considered peoples opinions among many other things are a much better signal.
Oh, bullshit. Yes, people are irrational in lots of ways, but on such a simple thing, where I personally know people who search for pants with more reasonable pockets (or even modify the pockets on the jeans they find, since they're sometimes just sewed shut), it is transparent to me that your impulse to trust "the magic jeans experts" is indefensible.
There are a limited number of retailers in a space where many like to try on the product. There are only a handful of major brands. It is cheaper to make and sell fewer SKUs. Style and fashion are driven by relatively few individual people.
Sure, it's obvious that some (perhaps many?) either like or don't care about the bad pockets. It's also transparently the case that if there are not readily available alternatives, still more will buy the products anyway.
It is also transparently obvious that this can and does result in sizeable numbers of unhappy consumers who want what they claim - better pockets.
You trying to simplify that with "women actually DO want shitty pockets" is absolutely wild.
Those pants looks like they have good pockets, and they aren't cargo pants. Pockets for women are trivial to find, I found them instantly!
So the problem isn't "women's clothing doesn't have pockets", the problem is "the clothes I like doesn't have pockets". If women wanted pockets they could go buy pants with pockets, but they choose not to.
Well those are dress pants and not jeans, but more importantly the existence of an example online doesn't contribute anything. Nobody is claiming that pockets don't exist lol, just that they're often not available in regular stores with any regularity.
I think I've also reached my limit of interest in discussing pockets.
> the existence of an example online doesn't contribute anything
It sure does, H&M is massive and available all over the world. Them having cheap pants with pockets means that women all over the world can easily access pants with pockets.
If women craved pockets so much then those pants would sell out and they would expand the offering with more kinds.
It's childish and unrealistic but it's actually consistent with the prevailing HN attitude in just about any thread where economics shows up.
We need a variant of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect where individuals are eager to forget that they are themselves not experts in the topic at hand, and are therefore unqualified to evaluate a large variety of statement and scenarios.
Not to mention, my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want - you should try it sometime. With that in mind, even if you want to hold on to your weird market utopia fantasy, it certainly seems like there must be a sizeable minority of people who want (and, anecdotally, who DO go out of their way to find when possible) pants with functional pockets.
"That's what the market sells so it's what you must want" is such a wild take.