Honestly...

This all depends on the local cultural situation. It is very common in Scotland and Ireland for Presbyterian ministers in the Free Church, Free Presbyterian, and Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland to wear collars and of course the Protestants invented the collar, which was later adopted by the Romanists when they dropped the full cassock as normal daily wear. 

It also used to be common in the United States for Presbyterian ministers to wear a collar (even Charles Hodge wore one). It was killed primarily by egalitarianism. 

I wear a Geneva Gown for both cultural and, in my opinion, good theological reasons. 

"casual man with his authentic tats (he's not wearing jeans because he's a day laborer)."

Except for when he is.

http://pastortimlecroy.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/a-short-history-of-the-wearing-of-clerical-collars-in-the-presbyterian-tradition/

Oops, sorry for the duplicate link. Somehow missed the 10:38 comment!

... of clerical uniforms, particularly concerning the way that Romans adopted Protestant dress when the requirement that they wear a cassock as normal uniform was relaxed.

This is one reason I dress in public in ways that ordinary folk in this part of the world think is Roman.  It invariably gives me a chance to make a variety of useful points in my discussions with inquirers, as to original Protestant genesis of the fashion they think is "owned" by the Romans.  Of course, there is a whole host of "stuff" in our proper Christian heritage that Protestants -- the Reformed often leading the way -- have overtly ceded to the Romans, leaving themselves impoverished in the bargain. 

My public dress, therefore, amidst its other purposes, establishes a sort of beachhead for reclaiming from Western Christianity what is every bit as much the property of Protestants as it is the Romans, whose Christianity-ness (where it is actually there) is far more at home within Protestantism than within Romanism. 

You should come visit ClearNote Church, Indianapolis, where one of the pastors is a day-laborer, tattoos and all :)

At one time, I belonged to the a congregation associated with the Evangelical Covenant Church in North America (last stop before becoming Episcopalian -> Anglican). Through a listserv associated with this denomination I came to know a pastor who ministered in a rural parish in West Virginia adjacent to southeastern Ohio. 

He told the listserv the reason he wore a collar in places like hospitals,  hospices, nursing homes and the like was because he found that people seemed to respect him more when he self-identified himself as a "man of the cloth" and felt more comfortable approaching him than if he wore a business suit and just a name pin with The Rev. Glenn yyyy and his church affiliation.

Well, I spend my free evenings throwing 20 year olds around and perfecting my arm bars with the numerous family members produced from my vigorous monogamous heterosexual lifestyle. I also wear a white Geneva on Sunday and clericals during the week because I'm a Reformed pastor. I think some of lamest things I could wear here in Southern California is the casual clothing of an effeminate hipster or the pretentious blazer and bow-tie of a Southern lawyer.

A 46 year old former Marine.

God commanded the Levites to wear official robes for beauty and so that the people would respect them.  The Levities have gone, but beauty and respect have not, being the eternal principles expressed in the Mosaic dispensation.

Vestments are based on solid biblical principle.  Of course, if a Pastor feels uncomfortable wearing them, he is free not to.  

Tim, a black stole (a scarf to me) signifies authority to preach and communicate the sacraments.  The hood tells the people that their minister is properly educated.  The long Old English white surplus looks good, lends and air of authority, and says that the wearer is one of the good guys.  A cassock keeps one warm in the English climate, and is not a vestment.

Naturally, they are not compulsory, unless required by the authority of your church's rulers.

The word priest is Old English for presbyter, it is a contraction.  A priest is not a sacerdos, a sacrificer.

In short, these English vestments and names are not sacerdotal in any way.

A black Geneva gown says that you are from an Academy, that you are a scholar.  What has that to do with pastoring? Ties are fine, but who wears a suit today except a Baptist pastor?

A pastor must look good and command respect by the way he dresses, whatever that dress may be.

The word "priest" might have come down from Greek "presbuteros" through Latin, then Germanic to Old English to Middle English to Modern English, but somewhere along the line its meaning changed. And it was over 400 years ago, since "presbuteros" is translated "elder" in the KJV consistently, and "hiereus" is translated "priest." In English for the last 400 years at least, Jesus has been called our "High Priest", not our "High Sacerdos." Nor does it mean that He is our "High Presbyter" or "High Elder" as your point would mislead people to think.

Not to mention that the #1 definition on Dictionary.com is "a person whose office it is to perform religious rites, and especially to make sacrificial offerings."

And Wikipedia's entry starts with, "A priest is a person authorized to perform the sacred rituals of a religion, especially as a mediatory agent between humans and deity(s). They also have the authority or power to administer religious rites; in particular, rites of sacrifice to, and propitiation of, a deity or deities."

Emphases mine. 

I'd say it's a little bit too late to reclaim "priest" as an abbreviation for "elder", especially since "elder" is shorter. :)