A few thoughts since some of you are missing the forest for the trees:
-The inflation rate being used is CPI-U, which is based on an essential basket of goods. As the world changes this changes. For example, the cost of a horse is replaced with the cost of a car. So you don't get to summarily dismiss this metric because the "world changed." Such a simple statement means you probably don't understand the metric. In the big picture food and shelter have held up pretty well.
-On the flipside, our definition of acceptable living standards has risen incredibly. There was no such thing as seeing a specialist when you needed a doctor. Homes are larger with fewer people living in them. Nannies and day cares were non-existent. Going out to eat wasn't a thing. The amount of necessary stuff you "need" is higher.
It's not that this metric is bad, it is just a data point to say that in general wages have kept up with and exceeded inflation. However, the consensus standard of living has risen so much faster. The idea of any human today living without their own space, a car, cell phone and internet is something CPI wouldn't account for in this sense. It's not that wages didn't keep up, it's that the country has decided that poorest are in need of more. (e.g. Generally a poor person today lives better than a middle class person from the 40's. This is a generally dismissed viewpoint as it is hard to not compare them to their contemporaries).
Ms. Warren tries to distort this fact by using the most convenient high point in the 70's to make it seem like wages aren't keeping up, ignoring that her starting point was near the end of a period where wages significantly outpaced inflation. Thus it will seem like wages are declining.