> France also has kind-of a colonial empire still going on. Could that have an effect?
They were officially post-colonial by that time, and what is left is perhaps more a financial drain than a net income gain, although geostrategically invaluable.
> Every additional level of quality costs more and more to achieve. Not to mention that often the increase of quality isn't really noticeable. Eg lead paint vs not, better wiring (fewer house fires), better insulation (lower heating costs), better air circulation (less mold) etc.
They might increase cost, or they might not, as they are logical continuation of progress (as in, does lead-less paint really cost more to produce than leaded paint?) but in the end, they are "marginal" costs on a house, maybe in the order of 15%? So by themselves, they are not going to increase the price by 300%.
> I'm from a former Soviet state.
That brings a very different perspective, yes. Having spent quite a lot of time in eastern Europe, it is clear that the life experienced in that period was very, very different, and that many improvements where brought in, in quality and quantity.
But taking the road example, if you go to Belgium, you will have the joy of experiencing the inverse phenomenon, with a decrepit infrastructure that has been much, much better in the past. Imagine the moon surface you described, and then on a motorway, with cars driving by at 130 kph.. I've seen motorway signs covered in moss, as if an apocalypse had hit.
For clothes, I have items that were bought at the turn of the century and are still "wearable", but no recent clothing item seem to survive more than a year or two, independently of the cost. Which is an annoyance: I wouldn't mind paying more for something that lasts, but, so far, haven't found a brand that does. Of course, the current state of affair is an upgrade on the quality and quantity of clothing that was available in ex Eastern-block states. (Although, as bad as the fabric and colors were, I can only assume that they were built to last?)