Surprised I'm not seeing much mention of Bolt. They have some of the best light roasts (good for espresso) in the city, world class beans.

But tbf that area in particular is one of the best locations for that kind of thing in the city. The whole river walk culminating in the pedestrian bridge is a perfect meeting place/event spot.

>I wouldn't say "way" less: most of the environmental impact of a shoe comes from the soles (and midsole, if they had it). And the overall impact depends on the alternative, how/if it is recycled, and the impacts of producing it to begin with (raising cows and making leather generally has a very high impact).

You're gonna need to drop a source on that cause I don't know if that's true. But regardless, the point is that no matter what shoe ($800 GYW boot or $10 Walmart sneaker) the sole is going to wear out and need to be thrown away. You can either throw away the entire thing or just the sole. So technically speaking it's actually 100% less waste at the end of the day (you're preventing everything that doesn't need to be thrown away from being thrown away). True about raising cows but that gets muddy because those cows are usually being raised for meat/dairy anyway.

> since I want/need insulated and waterproof / salt proof uppers. Leather doesn't fit the bill for me

You do you but I've worn my Red wings every winter for the past 5 years shoveling 2+ feet of snow (often completely burying my feet) for hours and hours at a time, sometimes day after day. I went for a 3 hour long hike last year during one of the worst blizzards we've had and was fine, warm and 100% waterproof (you just need good socks for the 'warm' part lol).

> That is why the "vast majority" of the purchase is not the leather uppers - which are fairly insignificant in terms of overall cost of footwear.

I get what you're saying about relative cost to the original purchase, but I don't really see why that matters. What matters is how much money is coming out of your pocket while also factoring in the other important aspects like country of origin, waste, comfort, etc.

Better in that there's way less waste (throwing out an entire shoe vs just the part that actually needs to be replaced), it's economical, you keep your comfy worn in uppers, and (if you're comparing it to cheap shoes made overseas which it sounds like you are) they're not made using slave labor in factories that probably have zero emission/pollution regulations or safe working conditions or regulations on the raw materials.

Also saying that the "vast majority of the purchase" is the sole and that the upper is just leather will holes punched in it is ridiculous lmao. Do you have any idea how leather/Goodyear welted shoes are made? A ton of work goes into crafting and stitching the upper, and stitching it to the sole, not to mention the grade and quality of leather used in the first place.

When it comes to boots that use 3rd party soles like Vibram or whatever (which my Red Wings do), footwear companies literally buy those in bulk and just shave them down to size lol. Costs peanuts and is just the final part of the manufacturing process.

Better than replacing the entire shoe/boot.

When people say "BIFL" it's usually within the scope of whatever they're talking about. For shoes and boots, it's assumed that you'll have to replace the soles eventually. But good uppers (not "regular expensive shoes", high quality crafted leather) will easily last you a lifetime.

We all know and understand the literal meaning, I think it's the semantics and sentiment behind what was said though.

If I told you that the next time you drive your car there's a very high likelihood one of the wheels comes off, and it does, you're not gonna be all surprised like "whoa there's been a malfunction!!". You would probably be more like "oh that thing happened that he said was going to happen".