Shorts may feel nice and casual on your legs on a warm summer's day, but they're not so gentle on your wallet. Usually the fact that one obviously uses less cloth than the other makes it hard to be accepted. So what gives?

    It turns out clothing sellers aren't trying to cheat you by charging you too much money. They're just pricing shorts according to what it costs to produce them. Extra material does go into a full pair of pants but not as much as you may think. As experts explain, shorts that don't fall past your knees may contain just a fifth less cloth than ankle-length trousers

    Those same details that end up accounting for most of the material—pockets, belt loops, waist bands—also require the most human labor to make The physical cotton in blue jeans accounts for just a small part of its price Jag. Most of that money goes to pay the people stitching (缝合) it together, and they put in roughly the same amount of time whether they're working on a pair of pants or some shorts.

     For another example, short-sleeved shirts cost roughly the same as long-sleeved shirts. There are also numerous invisible factors that make some shorts more expensive than nearly identical pairs, like where they were made9marketing costs, and the brand on the label. If you don't want to spend $40 on something that covers just a small piece of leg, stay at home with your wallet!

A. More or less, shorts almost cost what pants do.

B. This is where the true cost of a garment is determined.

C. This price trend becomes popular across the fashion field.

D. This is because most of the cloth is sewn into the top half.

E. In general, a pair of shorts isn't any cheaper than a pair of pants.

F. To tell you the truth, it is a real bargain to pay for a pair of shorts.

G. Customers are willing to purchase a pair of shorts if it is at a reasonable price.