I posit that under a stable currency system, many of those items would have fallen in price. The means of production of each one, scale of available transport and variety or types are cheaper and more efficient today. By any rights, they should be cheaper.
Also, each and every one of those items can be currently purchased for at or below the quantity of silver or gold that would purchase them in 1900, for the reasons I've outlined. Additionally, the price of the sugar, butter, and train ticket are directly and majorly subsidized by taxpayer money, FWIW.
Zowie! I had no idea I was saying that-- thanks for the heads up because I'd never have known that without your help. Ok, I was wrong to advocate run away inflation and I really do apologize; please give me another chance. What I'd really like to get across (and maybe you can help me a bit on the right wording) is something to the tune of how nominal prices are all well and good, but what matters more to me is whether or not we die because we can't feed ourselves.
IOW, food prices and wages both go up or down. As long as wages end up higher than food we don't starve. Our Creator has blessed us with prosperous times; i.e. more and more people can feed themselves with less effort than was possible in past generations. Normally I love complaining as much as the next guy, but maybe in this case ingratitude would a sin.