Hmm that's an interesting thought. You think that a post-scarcity society is impossible because the evolutionary urge to further one's genes will always outstrip the capacity to produce resources. That there can never be any equilibrium? Very Malthusian. Hopefully we can apply lessons from this article - that subtle social nudges can have outsized and hopefully beneficial effects.
The whole demographic catastrophe unfolding in the West is to do with how hard and expensive it is to raise even 1-2 kids to have good chances at life, and people largely choosing scarce commodities over having kids.
There are no lessons in this article other than that made-up preferences lead to silly outcomes.
Electronics and factory farm tomatoes are cheap, and near nobody lacks food or a phone.
Good teachers, black caviar, decent real estate away from poor people (lol) are inherently scarce. As for social economics enquiries, they always seem to require people to give up fruits of their labour for no compensation. As much as I like free stuff, I very much find this undersirable.
The price of tomatoes has inflated at a rate of about 3.55% per year, up a total of 1,049% since 1953. In that same period, minimum wage rose from $0.75 to $7.25. In 1953, an hour's work would have bought you one tomato with a bit left over, today an hour's work leaves you short. Tomatoes have not become cheaper.
Source: https://www.in2013dollars.com/Tomatoes/price-inflation
Or don't bother with canned tomatoes from your link - things like flour, butter, milk and meat all got cheaper relative to the minimum wage.
Fresh tomatoes went from 25-30 cents per pound to 1-2 dollars per pound, i.e. got cheaper too.