I think that you’ve hit the nail on the head here. This sort of outlook, this materialism, the worship of Mammon, it is the rot at the heart of what passes for conservatism in modern America.
Don’t have too many kids, they’re expensive. Send the kids you have to college, they need a good job. Both parents need to work to get that big house and electronic gadgets. Immigrants are great, they worker harder and for less money than lazy Americans - so profits can go up. Leave your family and home town to get a job in this or that big city. Big business is great, they should be able to do what ever they want. Billionaires are great. The problem with this generation is that they don’t work hard enough. We need more economic spending and stimulus. Lower taxes on the rich and corporations. GDP is up so everything is good.
This is the paradigm where success is measured by our nation’s ability to frivolously consume, to deplete our wealth to enrich China, Jeff Bezos, and to use up landfills.
These attitudes, fully embraced by the Boomer so called conservatives have done as much or more harm to true conservatism that any wacky Social Justice propaganda has.
That is why conservatism is doomed unless conservatives ourselves can start living lives of virtue. By putting family, tradition, community, and ideology above luxuries and comforts.
I think its important to distinguish between causes and effects, though.
To go through your list of examples:
1) I do 100% agree that "kids are expensive" is not a good reason to not want kids.
2) I don't think there's anything wrong with sending kids to college. I do think its become an unhealthy cultural norm. Not everyone needs to go to college. Additionally, there's an important 'wealth vs income' dichotomy that I'm going to address later.
3) I don't think there's anything wrong with both parents working. I don't think a family should have a big house just to show off, but there are plenty of uses for space.
4) Immigration does need to be much better controlled.
5) I think frequent moving is a major contributor to the fall of the family as a social unit. I'm skeptical of the idea that people moving to the big city are really that much better off in the long run. Again, that 'wealth vs income' dichotomy comes into play.
6) Billionaires aren't great, but they are (somewhat) useful in society as a source of concentrated capital.
7) So said Plato and the Ancient Egyptians. Again, I agree.
8) I agree that stimulus and economic planning's importance is overstated.
The problem isn't so much that people want things. It's that their wants are expressed destructively. A desire to improve your life and your kids lives financially isn't bad, its when you're sacrificing yours or their social, cultural, or spiritual well being.
Indeed, the right kind of financial development is even very good. The 'wealth vs income' dichotomy is the difference between two attitudes about goods & money.
Are you trying to create stability and firm foundations for your family (by accruing wealth), or are you trying to just endlessly increase your families lifestyle (by accruing income)?
Wealth in this case isn't about dollars or net worth. Its about the stability that comes from a firm financial footing in a neighborhood, along with strong social connections to the area. Settling down and buying a house and sending your kids to the same school from K-12, then to a relatively local college, and then them living in the area they grew up in has advantages money can't buy.
Income is about always chasing after a lifestyle. Always increasing your standard of living with an increase in paycheck, always moving to chase that new wage increase, etc. It divides families and prevents strong social structures from forming.