Do you really consider that some % offered to you as an interest on savings account make a difference when there is almost 100 billion USD printed each month in form of bond purchases by Fed?

I'd say more: by locking your money in the savings account (in return for few %) you guarantee your bank protection from bank run. If suddenly it turns out your bank is being bailed-in (your deposit is partly taken by central bank), or dollar goes down, they have all legal reasons to deny you access to your cash. Also, they can reliably use that cash for tons of loans (based on fractional reserve, of course) since you are not going to remove that cash from your balance any time soon.

These little favors: "FDIC insurance", "interest payments" are all pieces of a theater to make you either blind or a part of the scheme (but you will lose nonetheless).

Yes. Interest rates are low now, but over a 100 year period like you are complaining about compounding will offer a significant offset to inflation.

My point is largely that if the charitable argument still makes your point, it makes the situation look even worse than the favorable number and rhetoric against the system that you are using. Government policy towards inflation is partly a result of a desire to have people put their money to work, exactly in things like savings accounts, so it makes sense to account for those benefits, even in a criticism.