Maybe it has to do with WWII. After WWII, the US was the only great economic power left undamaged. Our industries supplied the world, and they boomed. That wealth trickled down to many people in the US. Now, decades after WWII, other countries around the world have developed their own industry, driving down global prices and wages. As a result, perhaps the average global worker is better off, but the average US worker is worse off. This may partly explain why median wages have been stagnant in the US since 1974ish.

I wonder how much of comfort is attitude or perspective. I also happen to be a single man living in a high-rent city (Palo Alto). My income is about $30,000. Rent is my largest expense by far, but overall I feel quite comfortable. I manage to contribute $5k each January to my Roth IRA. No doubt if I had children or medical expenses, my $30,000 income would be strained, but right now I feel relatively comfortable on it. My needs are met.

I live in a shitty small apartment in a run down part of SF, and my annual rent is $20,000. Either you're talking net income, PA is way cheaper than I've been led to believe, or there's some factor I'm missing

What I'm getting at is it's easy to get by on simple jobs like that when you live in Nowhere, WY. Then, later, when the town booms people are incredulous about how you were ever able to afford living there.

That's exactly my point though, then & now are almost certainly not apples to apples, and "Well I couldn't afford their house today" is exactly the thing that I am saying is a mistake to think.

Older generation, especially those through the hardsihps of war, are happy to live, period. Jobs we consider shitty today (like cashier or truck driver) are much better than infantry man in war torn Europe.

Today's people are much more spoiled, not just in consumerism, but the idea of being above manual labour, freedom to chase your unprofitable goal, not settle until you found a dream job are all quite new.