The problem with most economic analysis is that adjustments are generally based on arbitrary metrics like PPP or inflation.
If a child (or couple) in Britain earns three times as much, in "real" terms, that their parent (or parents) did at that stage of life, they will probably have to live in a smaller house, further from the center of town, with a worse commute.
Pretty much the biggest QoL improvements knocked out. The fact they can buy a few more toys or nicer food is not really that consequential.
Exactly. I probably earn 2X what my father made, inflation adjusted, when he was my age. Buuuut, I pay 5X what he paid for housing, 20X what he paid for healthcare, ∞X what he paid in student loans, have a commute 6X longer than his, live in a house 75% the size of his (he also had two houses at my age, by the way), work 1.25X his hours and have a crappy 401k rather than a nice defined-benefit pension. Comparing just salary misses the story.
Yes, they should, but they are not, and realistically cannot be.
Inflation statistics are almost useless in calculating quality of life for this reason.
They calculate an average over a population. An example of why this is silly, is that the average 40 year old both has lower personal inflation _and_ can weather inflation much more readily than the average 20 year old.
If a child (or couple) in Britain earns three times as much, in "real" terms, that their parent (or parents) did at that stage of life, they will probably have to live in a smaller house, further from the center of town, with a worse commute.
Pretty much the biggest QoL improvements knocked out. The fact they can buy a few more toys or nicer food is not really that consequential.