the bigger chunk of the 1960s era basket (everything else) increased in price at a much faster rate than food. so i think the poverty line is moving down more than it "should"
the bigger chunk of the 1960s era basket (everything else) increased in price at a much faster rate than food. so i think the poverty line is moving down more than it "should"
165+1005=1170
you can't just say "multiply everything by inflation" and have it equal out at the end because the weights of each bucket are different (due to the 1/3 food thing orshansky said originally)
165+1005=1170
you can't just say "multiply everything by inflation" and have it equal out at the end because the weights of each bucket are different (due to the 1/3 food thing orshansky said originally)
and the inflation on "everything else" is relatively high, let's say 15. this averages to 10, yes.
but the WEIGHT applied to the bigger "everything else" bucket is higher.
and the inflation on "everything else" is relatively high, let's say 15. this averages to 10, yes.
but the WEIGHT applied to the bigger "everything else" bucket is higher.
but that assumes the rate of inflation has been the same for "food" + "everything else" (which in this example, i set at 10
but that assumes the rate of inflation has been the same for "food" + "everything else" (which in this example, i set at 10
let's say in 1960, you spend $33 on food and $67 on everything else.
that inflation-adjusts by a factor of ~10 to get to 2025 dollars.
let's say in 1960, you spend $33 on food and $67 on everything else.
that inflation-adjusts by a factor of ~10 to get to 2025 dollars.
i, too, love to spend billions on the part of my business that does not actually generate very much revenue
i, too, love to spend billions on the part of my business that does not actually generate very much revenue