I don't think it's such a mystery or revelation as the author seems to make it out to be. When a country/people are young and poor, like we were in the 1950s,

I don't think it's such a mystery or revelation as the author seems to make it out to be. When a country/people are young and poor, like we were in the 1950s, everything is about physical goods to make our lives better. That's where everyone is spending their hard eared money, incurring their labor. Manual labor, to make goods and services -- and those services that don't transmit very far. Now, 60 years later, everyone has huge material wealth built up -- the legacy of decades of labor and productivity. So first of all there's just a lot more money sloshing around to be spent. Money is spent easier now -- do you remember how tightfisted your parents were about money? Because it was scarce! Now it's easy -- even they are more casual about it. And then, what is there to spend on? You don't need another dishwasher. So you spend on leisure activities, luxuries, intellectual/social goods. Things that don't require huge amounts of manual labor. Things that can be recorded and replayed, and everyone is willing to pay a couple dollars for. The people who produce things for that market are of course gonna be the ones who luck out. But the pendulum swings back and forth, and I'm sure it will again for us some time. Go to another country, and the pendulum is on the opposite side.