Are we really so much better off than people in 1910

Often hear statements like we are X better off than people in 1910.

Quote from recent book (which?) that in 19 weeks we can earn enough to have same standard of living as someone in 1923 (in US). Also Maynard Keynes economic prospects for our grandchildren.

However, I have been sceptical that simple inflation or gdp calculations suffice. For example, goods like housing that are scarce may rise in li e with demand, some goods are status goods, and others depend on status eg getting a partner. As such, I think that inflation or gdp underestimates growth esp post medical breakthroughs… (which actually correlated little with wealth eg bertie wooster still did not have antibiotics even though 100% leisure)

Also relates to "why don't we have more leisure?" Often answer to that is that we rationally choose to keep working because value of labour has gone up. But if we are in status race or key goods price has gone up at same rate then this argument is wrong.

Especially interesting in terms of consumption regulation and esp housing price regulation.