I find this fascinating. My family opted to live in the city, rather than in the suburbs, because the cost of housing is so much lower. We opt to drive ten-year-old (or older) vehicles rather than the new and flashy ones. I buy my clothes secondhand, I walk to work... We could have the bigger house in the suburbs, we could have new vehicles, I could drive to work every day -- but then I would be worried about money, worried about getting a promotion so I could afford more nice things, worried about keeping my job when the economy sours.
I love the quote Treva picked out of the article. "Instead of growing the economy, maybe we need to recalibrate society to make everyone happier and successful with less." It makes me think of FDR's Second Bill of Rights. He wanted Americans to have the right to "adequate food and clothing and recreation," a "decent home," "adequate medical care," and a "good education."
I for one am okay with "adequate," with "decent," with "good." I don't need a Cadillac. I don't need a mansion. I think that many people today want the best of everything, and people are no longer content with "adequate," "decent," or "good." A lot of people seem to be looking for more -- and don't seem to have any understanding of the concept of "enough."