Your examples provide evidence that increasing efficiency and scale can lower the cost of production, and the results are shown in the market place.
You have failed to show what these items would of sold for in un-inflated dollars.
It does not promote savings when a quarter drops to a couple of cents, in 25 years or so. Inflation promotes borrowing, with the intention of paying back the loan with inflated, or less valuable money.
Inflation is a theoretic calculation using flexible yardsticks. Nothing is inflation proof or constant not the Mark, not the dollar not gold not oil not grain. The point I was making was that your candy example can be countered by those products whose prices have fallen. Your candy price was also in nominal dollars so it is hard to see what relevance your objection to my use of current dollar prices has to do otherwise only makes my point stronger. But within the last ten years inflation has been low, 2% or less, so the price of the $1000 tv would be maybe $230-40 in 1995 dollars and the computer the same.
Borrowing and profitting from inflation is only possible when the banks have not put an inflation premium in the interest rate. Hence only UNANTICIPATED inflation allows the borrower to profit. Those days were ended by the inflation of the 1970s and now the banks are fully protected.
Low interest rates hurt only the wealthy who may be trying to live off interest. The other 99% of the population are helped by them.