The problem with that is that there have been tremendous advances in agricultural productivity since 1969 that have kept food prices relatively low. On an inflation-adjusted basis, food is cheaper today than it has ever been. Housing, on the other hand, has skyrocketed - but isn't accounted for in the HHS calculation. I guess the assumption is that the real poor won't try to live in their own housing, but will prefer government projects.
And no Administration is ever going to change the calculation, because any change would result in a greatly increased number of "poor" on that President's watch.
The problem with that is that there have been tremendous advances in agricultural productivity since 1969 that have kept food prices relatively low.
Since the baseline is 1969, and it is adjusted with overall CPI, three time that amount still reflects a reasonable calculation for the threshold povertylevel expenditure.
And no Administration is ever going to change the calculation, because any change would result in a greatly increased number of "poor" on that President's watch.
And this is somehow bad? Maintaining a consistant and conservative measure assures the sales tax rebate does not end up being a sumplement to income, it will remain just what it is, a rebate of taxation at the level of necessity spending.
Look at the first chart here :
http://www.heritage.org/Research/SmartGrowth/BG1426.cfm
Living in SoCal where a modest home runs at least $500K, I often forget that you can still buy a 3br2ba home in Ft Worth, TX or Memphis, TN for less than $150K. Inflation adjusted, that would have been $28K in 1969.