Another fascinating post, though part of your argument may be a bit misleading. You write:

"Another telling indicator of how wealthy we are today is the modest number of hours we must work to meet our basic dietary needs. Today Americans spend, on average, only 6 percent of their income on buying food. If they work a 40-hour week, that means that it takes them barely two hours to earn enough to feed themselves for the week. That leaves far more to spend on consumer goods, entertainment and vacations."

It would leave more for entertainment and such, if we weren't spending so much on housing. In earlier times, housing was free or nearly so. For the cost of building a shelter, you had a home in most cases. Now, you can't buy the land -- much less the structure itself -- without paying (normally on credit) the equivalent of many years of labor.

I'm not talking about mansions. A modest apartment in a major European city costs about €350,000. That represents at least ten to fifteen years income for a professional – especially when interest payments are included.

So yes, food is a smaller percentage of essential expenses, but the sum total of those essential expenses (food, shelter, energy, education, health care, etc.) probably isn't much lower than it was for previous generations, and compared to the fifties and sixties, is actually considerably higher for Americans.

Having a full belly doesn't mean you're home free.

"Having a full belly doesn't mean you're home free."

:)