It's very much good advise to optimize spending by not spending where it's useless (no utility, social signaling) and to possibly increase spending where the happiness return is high.
For the people that are frugal for life to the point where it comes at the expense of quality of life, one relief is the tactic "spend to save". Lower your TCO by spending. Pay down loans and the mortgage. Make your home more energy efficient. Replace crappy products with things that last a long time.
It's an undervalued strategy. Extreme savers basically prepare for volatility. They have insecurities about the future. Lowering your future expenses reduces volatility and increases freedom at a later age. You're less affected when bad things happen. You can scale down work by working less hours or a simpler job.
This is one way to not end up as the richest person in the graveyard and it allows you to gradually retire.
That aside, one aspect the article did not address are family dynamics. I do not care about what car my neighbor drives or what he thinks about my car. Yet still one can be affected by "social wealth" within the context of a family.
One may be frugal whilst the other is not. You can guess who wins. The kids need Disney+ and somewhat later a smartphone, as you don't want them to be outcasts.
Society does have (subtle) ways to force you to spend, it's not necessarily flexing or one-upping, rather "fitting in".