[pixl97]

>, which is how do you educate the market to recognize the "cost" of low quality

Typically... pay them more. When I was broke quantity mattered more to me. Now that I have discretionary income I am far more selective.

See Also: 'Boots Theory' of Socioeconomic Unfairness

[ChuckMcM]

That is an interesting theory. From the perspective of craftspeople I have met a few who are both "low income" and focus a lot on quality for their tools. Having it be part of their livelihood meant that the longer it lasted, the less often it would be replaced. But it is certainly true that places like Ross lean into the "look" is more important than the "quality" message.

[corbulo]

I would add to this, in a lot of non-price sensitive consumer industries the perception of quality often overtakes actual quality; which is why brands will very frequently get bought out and hollowed but don't immediately fail.

It plays into exactly what you describe as being the more powerful motivator of the two. Though it does go both ways, you mention tools for lower income but expensive food (for higher income) is generally much higher quality.

I think it hinges on the industry and how obvious the quality is. Obviousness of quality requires a value-sense to be deeply thought out. Tools are not obviously higher quality, you have to think about it (the value of a dollar). Food is often obviously higher quality, and when it isn't its relatively inexpensive to discover (taco bell blows out your asshole, organic meats and veg make you feel more energetic).