Election Year: Rhetoric vs. Reality

By Isaac Greenwood

2016 has ushered in a national election cycle like none other. In the aftermath of the Great Recession of 2007-2009, and despite the rhetoric espoused by many of the leading candidates on both sides of the aisle, the still-recovering American economy would be best served by centrist economic policies given the fragility of international developments and tepid growth.

The Great Recession cost the American economy billions in productivity and had long-lasting effects on the domestic and international economic orders. Even after the height of the Recession, U.S. unemployment peaked at 10% as workers were laid off in increasing numbers. Thousands of Americans were impacted by the sudden burst of the housing bubble, which significantly devalued their homes while also setting of a global financial crisis from the prevalence of mortgage-backed securities. While China and Russia weathered the crisis relatively well, most countries heavily engaged with the U.S. economy, notably in Europe, felt the shockwaves of distress as the turmoil increased.

The Federal Reserve, under the guidance of former Chairman Ben Bernanke, engaged in bailing out or aiding firms deemed “too big to fail” like AIG and a variety of large banks which had become increasingly interdependent with a number of industries. The Fed embarked on a policy of quantitative easing and slashing interest rates to historic lows to maintain a high money supply and embolden the teetering economy. In addition to the fiscal policies such as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, Washington was successful in preventing a catastrophic meltdown of the U.S. economy.

However, the American economy is not out of danger yet. A myriad of factors remain that threaten not only domestic prosperity but also the international economic system given the rapid globalization of the past twenty years. The American Dream may still be attainable, but only with the careful monetary and fiscal policies that will not strain the moderate economic recovery of the past five years.

While unemployment has reached the Fed’s target of 5%, the labor force participation rate remains at 63%, down from its historic 66% average. To maintain full employment and continued consistent job growth, candidates with job creation programs would aid in the recovery as opposed to those who seek to cut unemployment assistance and government spending.

Another key measure of economic health is inflation. Often measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (PCE), inflation is currently below the Fed’s target of 2%. While in the United States this number is near 1.7%, European inflation is almost 0 and has forced the European Central Bank to enact quantitative easing through 2017 as a means to prevent another crisis. Rather than meddle in the workings of the Fed and politicize the institution, the incoming President must remain aware of Chair Janet Yellen’s guidance in bolstering the American economy and work to promote job security.

Beyond macroeconomic growth and stability, issues of wealth inequality and social security have become forefront topics for the average American. With a stagnant lower class and growing upper class, the American middle class has been shrinking over the past 45 years. The share of aggregate income held by middle-class Americans has fallen 19% from a previous high of 62% in 1970, and the Recession saw middle class wealth shrink by 28%. Once a representation of the American Dream and success, the middle class ought to be supported through tax cuts and incentives by future candidates to ensure domestic economic stability, and the increasingly wealthy upper classes should bear a larger burden of taxation to account for the wide discrepancies under the current system.

With increasing life expectancies, Social Security reserves, which are expected to run out of money by 2034, must be increased to provide for the nation’s poor and infirm. Politicians who suggest cutting Social Security benefits or taxes will fail to address the magnitude of the program by failing to provide for the 65 million who require it. As Mahatma Ghandi said, “A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members” and that certainly holds true with regards to the aged, infirm, and poor of the United States, although current policies seem to do little to ensure their future stability.

Given the precarious global economic situation, in addition to forecasts for another recession within the coming two years, drastic tax or spending cuts could exacerbate future economic issues and threaten to undo the slow but steady recovery of the past administration.

The Noir Market

By Nicholas Piccone

Early Christmas morning in 2014, the front door of the iconic Napa Valley restaurant French Laundry was greeted not by Saint Nick, but by an unknown masked man whose intrusion would only be discovered the following day. The burglar, however, was not after the cash in the vault nor the expensive décor of the restaurant.

Owner Thomas Keller and investigators instead found that the wine cellar had been pried open with a simple crowbar, a task made infinitely easier given that the normal ultra-secure state-of-the-art security system was disabled and that the building was in the midst of a large-scale renovation. Moreover, French Laundry does not possess an ordinary wine collection, even for a three Michelin-starred restaurant; in fact, its wine collection is likely to be worth more than most people’s homes. The thief was also no ordinary thief—he meticulously chose 76 of the finest bottles that totaled over $300,000 in value, an average price per bottle of almost $4,000, and left all else untouched.

This burglary represents neither the first nor the last of its kind in the area. On the same day, Prima, a high-end wine shop and restaurant outside of Oakland, experienced a failed robbery attempt that was only foiled due to a new alarm system installed after a February 2013 thief made off with tens of thousands of dollars of Bordeaux and Burgundy wines. Similarly, The Plumed Horse, a Michelin-starred restaurant an hour south, was burglarized in January of 2013, weeks before Prima, and had thousands of dollars in similar wine stolen from its cellar. Redd, another Napa Valley restaurant merely a mile away from French Laundry, had 24 rare and expensive bottles stolen after a burglar simply smashed a window with a hammer to gain entry January 2014. While all these crimes remain unsolved, Thomas Keller remains the lone owner who was lucky enough to recover much of his restaurant’s pilfered wine. However, they were recovered 3,000 miles across the country in Greensborough, North Carolina: how the French Laundry wine got there and who brought it there still remains a mystery.

Interestingly, all of these break-ins have involved both a crude choice of tools such as crowbars, hammers, and ladders, and yet an exquisite selection of specific vineyards and vintages. The combination of everyday tools and extraordinary bottles suggests that these ordinary criminals act either directly for an informed “customer” or know their target audience exceedingly well. A Thanksgiving Day 2013 robbery at a Seattle wine warehouse further reinforced this notion, in which thieves simply disabled motion detectors, spray-painted cameras, and stole $650,000 worth of wine before leaving a gas leak that destroyed the warehouse. Unlike the aforementioned restaurant robberies, the perpetrators were caught, allowing authorities to confirm suspicions that these thieves were everyday burglars, not experienced wine sellers.

While high-end robberies continue to become a growing concern across the wine community, counterfeit wine remains an even larger obstacle to overcome. Take the example of Bill Koch, billionaire and member of the famed Koch Industries family, who in 2005 bought four bottles of wine allegedly from Thomas Jefferson’s personal cellar for an estimated $500,000 only to discover that all were counterfeit. In fact, Koch estimates that he has lost $25 to 30 million in purchases of fake wine over the course of his lifetime. A large bloc of his fraudulent purchases—211 bottles worth $2 million—could be traced back to an Indonesian wine seller named Rudy Kurniawan. When the FBI raided Kurniawan’s operation in March 2012, they found repurposed old corks and over 19,000 fake labels from 27 of the world’s finest producers littering his home, which was cooled to 59 degrees (the temperature of a wine cellar). He was later sentenced to ten years in prison for selling an estimated $130 million in counterfeit wine. In the wake of Kurniawan’s arrest, the auction market for fine wine actually shrunk as much as 20% for a brief period due to hesitance in spending such hefty sums on potentially fake products.

Although the discovery of Kurniawan’s counterfeit operation shocked many and awoke the industry to how great the threat of fake wine could be, the global auction market has continued to grow. While estimates vary for how much counterfeit wine is currently in circulation, lifestyle magazine Wine Spectator estimates it to be around 5%, while French newspaper Sud Oest puts that number as high as 20%. Some of the most commonly faked wines include Bordeaux First Growth chateaux such as Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, Napa Valley estates like Screaming Eagle or Opus One, or Burgundy Grand Crus such as Domaine de la Romanée Conti, which runs as high as $25,000 a bottle for certain vintages. In fact, according to the 2013 documentary “Red Obsession,” there are currently more bottles of 1982 Chateau Lafite circulating auction houses than were ever actually produced by the estate. Although it is impossible to know the exact size of the black market for fine wine, Michael Egan, a counterfeit wine specialist, estimates the total black market for wine to be at least $100 million. This number could prove to be even larger considering that many fake products go unreported; private collectors frequently exchange wines and many collectors refuse to report fake wine out of embarrassment.

The explosion of the wine market is a very recent occurrence that has been driven by high demand and soaring prices. For example, a bottle of Chateau Lafite retailed for a few hundred dollars in the mid-1990s now sells for over $2,000. Wine experts point to one culprit for this massive price inflation: the Bao Fa Hu of China. With a name literally translating to “explosive rich,” they have contributed heavily to the growth of the wine-collecting market from $90 million in 2002 to over $300 million by 2013. Many of these nouveau riche Chinese businessmen have become infatuated with Western cultural status symbols and eye top-quality wine as a means of displaying their wealth and connections to the West. Their presence in the market has also likely increased the incentive for burglars to steal high-end wine—the thieves will receive higher prices from buyers who are desperate to find certain bottles or vintages.

Apart from simply boosting demand, China has contributed to the explosion in the black market wine market through poor record keeping of production and sale for older vintages as well as relaxed copyright laws. The lack of records and security measures such as serial number identification make many stolen bottles hard to track or many counterfeit wines to be passed off as authentic. Furthermore, the relaxed copyright laws enable counterfeiters to operate more freely in the nation and to imitate brands in order to fool inexperienced Chinese buyers. The Comité National des Conseillers du Commerce Extérieur de la France (CNCCEF), a foreign trade group, currently estimates that there is one counterfeit bottle of foreign wine for every real bottle in China. The estimate not only accounts for ultra-expensive fine wines but also everyday table wines.

Luckily, steps are finally being taken to curb this explosion of fraud. In late 2014, the Chinese government shut down a Chinese wine label called Yantai and arrested its owners for counterfeiting many well-known foreign wine labels. The company originally began as a legitimate importer but attempted to capitalize on the boom in the Chinese market for fine wines. Even more importantly, almost every luxury winemaker meticulously tracks every sale of every individual bottle as well as labels each bottle with a unique serial number. Both steps are done to ensure against theft and prevent fraud in the case that duplicated serial numbers or unused numbers should arise at an auction.

A large push from individuals has also been made to prevent the spread of crime within the wine selling industry. Auction houses now routinely hire specialists such as Michael Egan or Maureen Downey—a wine authenticator who commonly works with the FBI in investigations—to ensure that all sales are legitimate products. Furthermore, many wine collectors of significant means, specifically Bill Koch, have made it their mission to stomp out crime and expose fraudulent or black market sellers.

The rich clientele of the wine-collecting world have thus spurred the growth of a new, albeit extremely expensive, industry in wine authentication. Koch is said, for example, to spend $800 to authenticate every bottle he purchases—a sum greater than most people will ever spend on a single bottle. One such method of authentication uses the University of Bordeaux’s particle accelerator, which more frequently is used to examine wastewater from hospitals or fallout from nuclear disasters. Lead physicist Philippe Hubert will often, by request, examine the contents of a wildly expensive wine bottle using the machine, which could determine the chemical make-up of a bottle in question and compare it to a known composition of the bottle from that year. It is so effective that some estates, such as Bordeaux’s legendary Chateau Mouton-Rothschild, have created a database of bottle compositions compiled by testing the vintages in their own cellars.

Not all anti-fraud measures are coming from wine collectors—many are also coming from industry leaders, such as David Pearson of the famed Napa Valley producer Opus One. All bottles made today of Opus One come with a near-field communication (NFC) chip that customers can scan with a smartphone to watch a short video clip from the winemaker ensuring the authenticity of the product. Obviously, the method has a critical flaw in that an empty bottle could be repackaged and faked by a skilled counterfeiter, which is why producers will also include a tamper-proof seal. For example, Opus One hires SICPA, a Swiss company that makes ink for many of the world’s currencies, to create proprietary inks on the seal that show different images under different colored lenses.

The fine wine market has grown alongside an even greater explosion in stolen and counterfeit wine as criminals look to profit from ever-inflating prices. Winemakers face many challenges similar to those dealt with by other luxury goods producers, such electronics or leather goods, and these various industries must work together to combat escalating theft and fraud. The Coalition Against Counterfeiting and Piracy estimates the cost of intellectual property theft worldwide at $650 billion—which is greater than the GDP of all but 19 countries in the world in 2015—and the global market for fake goods at $68 billion. Significant progress in the fight against the black market, however, will not be made without cooperation from major manufacturing nations for counterfeit goods, most notably China, which have turned a blind eye to the illegal manufacturing of fake or knock-off goods. One must hope that in the near future China, along with similar manufacturing nations, succumbs to pressure from other developed nations and major corporations to crack down on illicit production. The expanded enforcement of intellectual property laws coupled with evolving technology used to both track authentic and combat counterfeit items would thus present a promising future in the fight to shrink the global black market for fine wine and other luxury items.

Every Man for Himself: Greco-Russian Relations Heighten Tension with EU

By Grace Shi

Greece became the epicenter of the European debt crisis in October 2009, when it announced that it had been understating its budget deficit for years.

To avoid a greater eurozone catastrophe, the so-called troika—the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the European Commission—issued several bailouts to Greece that came with harsh terms: austerity measures requiring severe budget cuts and tax increases. This money was meant to buy Greece some time to stabilize its finances and alleviate market fears, however, it mainly went toward paying off Greece’s international loans rather than stimulating the Greek economy.

Now, adding a new complication to an already strained system, hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees are fleeing to Greece. Nearly 130,000 migrants arrived by sea between January and March 2016 as neighboring countries, including Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Macedonia, have stopped allowing Syrian refugees to pass through. Greece, struggling to handle the refugee crisis and six years deep in financial deadlock, has seen a drastic reduction in its ability to respond efficiently to these problems, forcing the country to call upon the troika and fellow European Union members for aid. Conflicts have arisen due to Greek citizens’ hatred of the austerity measures and complaints that the troika is not doing enough to help Greece reboot its economy.

As Greece seeks salvation from these financial woes, Russia has stepped in with a tempting gas deal that will allow Russia to build a pipeline through Greece and western Europe. Through this deal, Russia has given Greece the opportunity for foreign investment as well as the chance to become an integral part of the energy industry in Europe, to the point where a “Memorandum of Understanding” was signed on February 24, 2016 by three natural gas companies: Russia’s Gazprom, Italy’s Edison SpA, and Greece’s DEPA SA. The Memorandum introduces the Interconnection Turkey Greece Italy-Poseidon project that will allow for deliveries of Russian natural gas to Greece, and from Greece to Italy, through an undersea pipeline in the Black Sea.

Russia has the world’s largest natural gas reserves, making it the largest oil producer in the non-OPEC countries and the second largest in the world. The ITGI-Poseidon pipeline deal comes after several other Russian gas pipeline plans, including the failed Turkish Stream project (terminated after disputes over Turkey shooting down a Russian jet in Syria) and the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which bypassed Ukraine and brought oil through Germany to the rest of Europe.

Countries in the EU are in discord over these Russian gas pipeline projects, because while many European countries worry about over-dependence on Russian energy, some—like Greece, Germany, and Italy—clearly stand to benefit from these projects. Moreover, after the 2014 Ukraine Crisis, irate EU countries and the United States imposed trade sanctions on Russia. However, the few EU countries that continue to conduct business with Russia find less incentive to continue these sanctions, as the Russian pipelines hold promise in shaking off the debt crisis. The 2016 deal with Greece has caused increasing alarm and conflict. Western nations fear that Russia and Greece will become too close, especially since the two countries already share cultural and religious ties, and after Greece voted the left-wing Syriza party into power. Strong ties between Syriza and Russia are evident through the extensive correspondence between Syriza leader Alexis Tsipras and Russian president Vladimir Putin. These talks ended with an agreement in 2015 on boosting investment ties between the two countries, and Tsipras has also said that Greece would seek to mend ties between the EU and Russia. Western nations view this growing relationship with unease, worrying that Greece is distancing itself from the rest of the EU and that they will use their relationship with Russia as a bargaining chip to improve its position in further negotiations.

On top of the energy dispute, many European countries are increasingly alarmed by Russian aggression. They fear the implications of Russia’s annexation of Crimea in the Ukraine Crisis. Western states worry that the annexation will allow Russia to easily conduct a possible invasion of Poland or the Baltic states. As reported by the 2015 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) annual report, “The pace of Russia’s military maneuvers and drills have reached levels unseen since the height of the cold war.” RAND Corporation, with the help of American military experts, conducted a series of war simulations from summer 2014 to spring 2015, and concluded that a Russian offensive against NATO countries in the Baltic—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania; all ex-Soviet countries and members of the EU—would overwhelm NATO forces in under three days.

Although NATO is expected to renew talks with Russia to improve military transparency, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg says it would be difficult to convene this meeting, ironically, with all the pre existing conflict between Russia and the alliance. US General and NATO Commander Philip Breedlove also accused Russia of “weaponizing” the migration of Syrian refugees in order to destabilize Europe, citing the use of barrel bombs against civilians in Syria to “get them on the road” and flee the country.

EU countries are split on how they should deal with the European debt crisis, dependence on Russian energy, sanctions on Russia, and Russian aggression. Greece needs money to deal with Syrian refugees—possibly spurred on by Russian terrorization—and its own debt crisis, and the Russian pipeline project seems like an ideal option. On the other hand, the Baltic states and Poland, countries that would be immediately threatened by a possible Russian invasion, oppose dependence on Russian energy and support increased sanctions against Russia.

The Greek Minister of Economy, Infrastructure, Shipping and Tourism, Giorgos Stathakis, has claimed that “there is a lot of potential” in Russian-Greek relations, and once problems which “exist…between the EU and Greece are overcome, then relations [between Moscow and Athens] will be fully developed.” The head of the Greek Foreign Ministry’s economic relations department, Giorgos Tsipras, said that the Greek government is looking to “have more multidimensional foreign policy and economic foreign policy and Russia is one of the countries” with which Greece is looking to develop a stronger relationship. Tsipras also said that Greece has made “every possible compromise” with the EU on the debt crisis, adding that “Greece is not going to make more sacrifices.”

The Syrian refugee crisis, however, casts a shadow on Greece’s relationship with Russia. At the very least, Russia seems to be taking advantage of Greece’s situation. Russia’s aggressiveness indicates that it may be taking deliberate steps to exacerbate the financial condition in Greece for its own economic and political gains. Deteriorating relations between both countries and the EU mean that a consensus on relief measures will be even more difficult to reach.

Greece, as the focal point of the European debt crisis, faces strong pushback for its fraternizing with Russia. At the same time, the EU faces the challenge of unifying its members under a common financial relief banner, which seems to require mitigating conflicts in foreign policy, at least on the topic of Russian aggression. Since the EU is merely a currency union and lacks punitive enforcement mechanisms, this big picture problem may be well out of its scope. The EU can only continue its interest rate cuts, bond purchasing programs, and bailout plans in hopes of yielding positive results to end the debt crisis. With economic policy and foreign policy clashing, and each EU country looking to fend for itself, it will be harder than ever to create unity and a common cause.

Fashion Friend or Deadly Foe?

By Catherine Wei

The world has never seen anything like this before. These revolutionary machines have changed society’s preconceptions of innovation by lowering production costs and increasing mass customization. They surpass traditional manufacturing processes and have become applicable to any field ranging from medicine to fashion. The gamechangers: 3D Printers.

In the words of Heidi Klum, at New York Fashion Week, “One day you’re in, and the next day you’re out.” The stakes are high. After months of drawing, designing, and dyeing, fashion designers are finally able to come out of their shells and watch models dressed in their work strut down the runway. For NYC-based designer Alexis Walsh, not only was the 2016 New York Fashion Week an opportunity to present her latest LYSIS Collection, but also a chance to exert the power of a 3D printer on the runway.

Walsh first learned of 3D printing in one of her industrial product design classes at the Parsons School for Design. In an article with 3D Printing Industry, she recalls how she started the process as an experimental whim, yet now, it has become her favorite design method. Her LYSIS Collection showcases numerous 3D printed pieces to complement the soft fabrics of the rest of the outfit. To her, the collection is meant to imitate the growth of viral structures. It is a combination of organic shapes with rigid silhouettes. One of Alexis’ past pieces was titled “The Spire Dress.” In collaboration with designer Ross Leonardy, Walsh assembled 400 3D printed individual titles using tiny metal ring connectors. The dress expresses a geometric formation with spirals around an individual’s body. Furthermore, rather than sketching her initial thought process and designs, Alexis digitalized a 3D model of the dress using Grasshopper, a software algorithm, and prototyped her piece with a MakerBot 3D printer. With 3D printing, designers now have the opportunity to create extraordinary pieces, challenging traditional fabrics and fashion craftsmanship.

Alexis Walsh is not the only designer to bring 3D printers into the fashion workplace. Back in 2011, Iris van Herpen debuted of one her first 3D printed pieces at Paris Haute Couture Fashion Week in her collection titled “Crystallization.” The black lace dress she designed had been developed by van Herpen’s own textile called TPU 92A-1, the first printable material that is both flexible, durable, and machine washable. That said, 3D printing has accelerated the possibilities for fashion. Rather than being custom-made, clothes are custom-printed.

The invention of 3D printing first appeared in 1983, when Charles “Chuck” Hull invented the first stereolithography machine, a printing process that enabled a 3D object to be created from digital data using a UV laser. Shortly after, in 1986, Hull patented the first stereolithography apparatus and one year later, in 1987, Carl Deckard patented the US Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) process.

3D printers operate using an additive process. While traditional manufacturers use a subtractive method to break material into products, 3D printers build a product up, layer by layer. After modeling an object or design on a digital software, an individual can send the file to the 3D printer. A laser source containing common materials like plastic, titanium, or resin, begins to draw out the base layers, solidifying the material as the laser begins to continuous draw layers.

With 3D printing comes many advantages. First, printing is cost-efficient compared to traditional manufacturing counterparts, as objects can be crafted at a fraction of the original cost. After investing in a 3D printer, the plastic material can cost as low as $3 to make a product. Second, the supply chain is greatly diminished. Rather than requiring the interaction between equipment makers, suppliers, prototypers, warehouses, and transportation, 3D printing simplifies the process to a digital-stored file that can upload data to a printer anywhere. Lastly, 3D printing provides a great medium for customization. For example, when designers Alexis Walsh and Iris van Herpen needed to adjust their measurements based on a model’s body, it was as simple as changing the increments on a digital file. Designers who invest in 3D printing can easily modify their garments through the 3D modeling software. This creates mass customization and a genuine connection between customers to a product that perfectly suits them as individuals.

However, it’s important not to immediately idolize 3D printers. While they have provided society with innovation, customization, and alternatives to the costly manufacturing process, 3D printers have been susceptible to abuse. Although 3D printing allows for mass customization, it struggles with mass production. Individuals cannot benefit from economies of scale with 3D printing. The time to produce and wait for the printer to design a product layer by layer is only acceptable for prototyping and small series, not for large scaling. The speed of printing depends on the speed of the printer-head extruding the raw material used.

There are also negative consequences to the environment caused by using 3D printers. According to Loughborough University, melting plastic through lasers by 3D printers consumes 50 to 100 times more electrical energy than injecting molding of the same item. Additionally, based on a 2013 study, printers that use a plastic filament can emit 20 billion ultrafine particles per minute. As a consequence, these particles can end up in the lungs and bloodstream, posing great risk to those with asthma.

Lastly, as the 3D printing industry grows, there are several legal risks that need to be addressed. For instance, if a helmet produced by a 3D printer reveals a flaw following an accident, who is to be blamed? The original model manufacturer or the printer manufacturer? With digital files, the line between who legally possesses data is thin. Through open-source 3D printing websites, intellectual data can easily be manipulated. With a click of a button, customers can download a company’s product file and adjust it.

The answer of whether 3D printers truly benefit society remains unclear. Several years ago, 25-year-old Cody Wilson became famous for producing the first 3D printed gun. After less than a year’s worth of work, Wilson was able to design and print a plastic, yet durable gun called “The Liberator”, easy enough to slip through metal detectors in public arenas. More so, his gun, which costs roughly $25 to print, is good for at least nine rounds. Before the US State Department took down the files, 100,000 people were able to download the digital file after Wilson uploaded it to the Internet. Instantly, this presents a controversial issue. According to the Bill of Rights, citizens have the rights to bear arms. However, should that allow for potentially deadly misuse of 3D printers?

Yet back at New York Fashion Week, designers like Alexis Walsh and Iris van Herpen have used 3D printers to design magnificent pieces that are idolized on the runway. This new technology disrupts supply chains and traditional fashion process. Within the fashion world, 3D printers have been praised for providing an alternative to the injustice and violence of manufacturing sweatshops. With great speed and affordability, models and customers have become one with their style. 3D printed garments can now be tailored to specific body types, praising individuality in the modern world. These extraordinary printers have created a new age of clothing.

It begs to ask the ultimate question: Are 3D printers fashion’s friend or deadly foe?