Unnecessary expense

A recent news story of socks that cost $420 (£350) caught my attention. A Google check shows that they do look lovely but there are more expensive socks available although I can also buy $2 socks at a local store, and they also look lovely. This seems to be in conflict with the recent fashionista approach of no socks as a high fashion choice.

The real concern should be the ways money can be used rather than spent. A $20 pair of socks should be quite comfortable and look good at the same time with the remaining $400 being used for a charity such as the Fred Hollows Foundation, an Australian charity that restores eyesight for $20 which means that 20 more people would be able to see the lovely socks or no socks.

There is so much poverty, hunger and homelessness in the world that $420 socks seem an unnecessary expense and a donation to any charity would be appreciated.

Dennis Fitzgerald,

Melbourne, Australia