Will olives prove in praise of conservatism?

The cost of a liter of cold-pressed olive oil with zero acidity and no added sugar from a branded company in a nice, clean, air-conditioned supermarket with ample parking and pleasant background music will cost only a few dozen shekels.
But you won’t get a liter of cold pressed from a farmer’s field. There simply isn’t one.
And if you beg someone who grows it, they might give you a few hundred shekels per liter and still do you a big personal favor. (And you probably don’t have any friends like that.)
A simple calculation shows that in an old-fashioned agricultural world, without sprays, without tractors, without calculations, without insurance, without fast, efficient, and cheap transportation, without fast and sophisticated presses, efficient bottling and packaging, and all the other costs, the cost of oil on a cold road can probably easily reach 1,000 NIS or more by today’s standards (and I’m being very careful).
 
Now we will approach the stage of lighting and begin to understand Rabbi Tarfon’s statement, “No lighting is done except with olive oil alone…” or those who disagree with him, or the use of olive oil in Hanukkah candles…
Or even light up the house at 1 pm…
It turns out they had to be quite wealthy in relation to us just to be allowed to light the Seder table, for example… (which probably took about an hour, give or take, not 6 hours)
When you delve into many issues in life between then and now, the gaps sometimes exceed all imagination, and this is in the easy part of calculating the cost of producing an agricultural product that is relatively not perceived (and rightly so) as having changed who knows what….
What about prioritizing values?
Have you defined any values ​​at all?
For the sake of the 16th century, how much more…
 
And after the premise, I have a question:
Trying to issue laws that are in line with reality and changing values.
This is starting to scare me. Why?
Because when we delve a little deeper into the facts and values ​​of the past, we see gaps and prioritization considerations that we never thought about.
So where do we have the confidence to assume that the law was spoken in reality A. And then to claim that in reality B the law itself dictates otherwise?
After all, the reality of that time, the glasses we wore, and the tint of the lenses we wear now, are probably so different from what they were, and if so, this is a major shock in the calculation of data and facts.
In a situation of shocks and uncertainty, it is better to cling to what was, which is relatively safe, than to change, and not risk that we change correctly, lest we change to the exact opposite side of what is right?
 
I feel a little like throwing up when I realize that I’m writing in praise of decadence and conservatism, but what can I do?
When it’s not safe, we lean on what is somehow stable. We can mock clinging to a straw when the ship is sinking, but when the entire field of vision is what there is, we are caught up in what there is…
 
What does the rabbi think?