To put it in perspective, hundreds of millions of families of 4 and more live in non-well-layed out 330sqft and 450sqft apartments in the developing world, to which a couple or a family of 3 living in a fairly-well-layed-out apartment with our modern trimmings would seem like a dream.
Current fashionable lifestyles? The idea of earthly possessions not being the source of true happiness (and really being the reason for suffering) is as old as at least Buddhism. If you want just an American source, we're still talking Thoreau, here.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/04/10/5-reliable-...
Also, if you look at the lives of people that inherent lot's of money they tend to do the higher versions of the same kind of things. It's like throw a party with great music, vs throw a party with a live band when what makes a party fun is not the music it's the people there.
People quickly become accustomed to any new positive thing introduced into their lives, make that the baseline and then start wanting something better.
The minimal stuff threshold is about survival and homeostasis, once that is achieved, anything beyond that does not produce lasting gains in happiness.
Having a computer with internet connection can increase happiness. For example elderly that feel more connected with their families. The important thing is the minimum threshold is a computer, so a 200$ laptop can fill this need just as well as a 10,000$ laptop.
Further, in that case it's connecting to people that's bringing happiness not the physical device.
I also find stuff makes me happier than experiences, so I realize I'm not representative of current fashionable lifestyles, but pretending everyone's the same or telling people "you shouldn't want that" isn't a practical policy solution.
(Or let's talk about medicine. Can we grow new livers, kidneys, etc, yet? How about when can we do it cheaply enough to easily be able to afford one for everyone who needs one?)