It's fun to compare prices over time:
| Item | Price in 1900 | Price in 1999 |
| Sugar (1 lb.) | $0.04 | $0.78 |
| Eggs (1 dozen) | $0.14 | $1.79 |
| Butter (1 lb.) | $0.24 | $4.49 |
| Beef (1 lb.) | $0.07 | $2.29 |
| Coffee(1 lb. on commodity exchange) |
$0.07 | $1.35 |
| Kodak camera* | $5.00 | $120.00 |
| Lionel electric train | $6.00 | $150.00 |
| Train ticket** | $13.00 | $43.00 |
| First-class stamp | $0.02 | $0.33 |
OTOH, were we really better off in 1900?
I posit that under a stable currency system, many of those items would have fallen in price. The means of production of each one, scale of available transport and variety or types are cheaper and more efficient today. By any rights, they should be cheaper.
Also, each and every one of those items can be currently purchased for at or below the quantity of silver or gold that would purchase them in 1900, for the reasons I've outlined. Additionally, the price of the sugar, butter, and train ticket are directly and majorly subsidized by taxpayer money, FWIW.
Inflation has nothing to do with us being better off today. It's a correlation not a cause. However, I do feel better that much more powerful computers are available today at just a fraction of the cost of what they were in the 1980's.