I think that someone from 200 years ago would readily understand that people don't want to die, and that having a longer life expectancy and dying is still not as good as not dying. Yes, there's always the possibility that they may think that dying is good, but it isn't, really; that's just a sour grapes-type rationalization that we only make in the first place because death sucks.

I'd also point out that nuclear war and NSA spying only can happen in a developed society because it takes a lot of resources to do those things. 200 years ago we were simply incapable of making a nuclear weapon, and even if space aliens had dropped the plans for one in their lap, they wouldn't be able to build one; it takes a huge infrastructure to make one that does indeed imply having overcome many scarcity limitations.

I'm confused by why your comment got downvoted. Not only is it correct in the context that scarcity is what is under discussion, but the point that modern developed societies resemble what someone in the past would likely have considered a utopia should be uncontroversial. Long lifespans and good medical care is in one of the things mentioned in the original book "Utopia". Other historical utopian literature has this aspect, as well as emphasizing education and low infant mortality. New Atlantis would be a prominent example.

The first and last problem on your list aren't related to scarcity.

This seems to be a problem with your question, not the answer.

If I asked someone from 100-200 years ago to imagine a post-scarcity society, I'd expect them to say something like "you can have as much of _ as you want". Furthermore, I think they'd clearly understand the difference between "have more of it than we get now" and "have as much as we want", whether it's lifespan, food and shelter, or anything else. I don't see why someone from that time period would think a "post-scarcity" society means a society that merely has less scarcity.

"Someone from the past would say our level of something is far beyond what they would have hoped for" doesn't equate to "someone from the past would say that our level of something is post-scarcity". Presuming they speak English and the meaning of the term "post-scarcity" can be explained to them, I don't see why they would confuse the two.

I suspect that in 1813 there were people who worried about whether they would find themselves without enough food, shelter, medicine, or defense from hostile outsiders.

If I described to them the level of food, shelter, medicine, and defense that their counterparts in 2013 had available, I expect they would go "Wow! That's amazing! Why, with that much abundance, I would never worry again!"

If I then explained to them how often their counterparts in 2013 worried about whether they find themselves without enough food, shelter, medicine, or defense from hostile outsiders, I would expect several reactions. One is incredulity. Another is some variant of "well, I guess some people are never satisfied." A third is "Huh. Yeah, I guess 'enough abundance' is something we approach only asymptotically."

If I explained to them the other stuff their counterparts in 2013 worried about , and how anxious they sometimes became about such things, I'd expect a similar range of reactions.

For my own part, I think " 'Enough abundance' is something we approach only asymptotically." is a pretty accurate summary.

So, sure. As we progress from "even wealthy people routinely suffer from insufficient food, shelter, medicine, and defense" to "even middle-class people routinely suffer from IFSMaD" to "poor people routinely suffer from IFSMaD" to "people suffer from IFSMaD only in exceptional circumstances" to "nobody I've ever met has ever heard of anyone who has ever suffered from IFSMaD", we will undoubtedly identify other sources of suffering and we will worry about those.

Whether we are at that point in a "post-scarcity" environment or not is largely a semantic question.

That's not intended for people who could work but chose not to. They require you to regularly apply for employment. The applications themselves can be stressful and difficult work if you don't like self-promotion.