[pratyushag]

In all seriousness, can somebody please help me understand what can be bought for $1.9 and how they came up with this arbitrary number?! I don't know if anybody can even get (or cook) one full meal a day for that... maybe I'm missing something?

Why even have such a measure unless it's going to be at least $10/day as one likely needs at least that much just to feed themselves the cheapest possible food they can find.

[antome]

You can actually buy 10lb / 5kg bags of rice for $5 in the US. http://www.walmart.com/ip/Great-Value-Long-Grain-Enriched-Ri...

That's enough for 50 servings, meaning you could feed yourself for $0.20 a day. Of course this ignores PPP, malnutrition and other factors, but don't underestimate how cheap food actually is.

[athenot]

A few years ago, I realized that several Asian cuisines are actually very cheap. Indian dishes are a great illustration of how you can make wonderfully tasty meals with very little of the expensive ingredients, and cheaper than fast food—not to mention way healthier.

[Sir_Vival]

It's not hard to be cheaper than fast food, other than possibly dollar/value menus.

All of the "staples" are insanely cheap - potatos, rice, etc. Most vegetables are as well. Toss in som emeat of whatever was on sale and you can easily cook a meal for 4 for 10 dollars, if not quite a bit cheaper.

[prawn]

Exactly. You just have to look past the 'big steak with some chips' meals, and appreciate something with staples plus a smaller portion of meat (e.g., stirfry, pasta, curry/stew bulked with potatoes).

[arebop]

Also, be willing to eat canned vegetables.

[mc32]

Frozen veggies are healthier and cheaper. Plus you get to cook them to your taste, rather than what the canner decides (cooking too long, adding salts, etc.)

http://www.heathernicholds.com/nutrition/frozen-vs-canned-ve...

[deadlast]

Frozen veggies definitely win if you have access to refrigeration -> access to energy. Canning is a revolutionary preservation technique in that it allows for long-term storage of perishables at room temperature.

[lumberjack]

It is 50 servings only if you live a western sedentary lifestyle.

[stephengillie]

1lb of raw rice has ~1200 calories, so 5lb has ~6000 calories, so a person needs about 2.5lbs per day.

At 200 calories per cup of cooked rice, you'd need 1.5 servings to get close to a "cheeseburger equivalent" meal in calories, and my "cheeseburger equivalent" system gives you 6-7 cheeseburgers per day at about 350 calories each. This means a person is eating 9-10 cups of rice per day.

That is a LOT of rice.

[jpatokal]

It's $1.9 at purchasing-power parity, worldwide.

For example, in India $0.3 has about the same purchasing power as $1 in the US. US$1.9/day is thus about Rs 400/day in India, which is survivable. For example, a simple meal at a food stall will be under Rs 100.

[pratyushag]

Rs. 100 is $1.5... nowhere near the $0.3 purchasing power you mentioned!

[john_butts]

So poverty then. Or I don't understand your math?

[john_butts]

Like, I'm not trying to be snarky, there's a lot of conversions going on there that aren't explicated. My takeaway is that if you can buy food and little else, that's poverty, right? Or no?

[solutionyogi]

I was born and brought up in India. When I was going to school in 1990, my dad used to earn around 6,000 INR / month (120$/month, exchange rate was 50 back then). We ate out probably once every few months but even then, the salary was enough to feed family of 5 and send me and my sisters to school. I think you lack the perspective on how poor India and China is.

[areyousure]

This source https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rupee_exchange_rate_h... seems to suggest that the exchange rate was 1 USD < 20 INR throughout 1990. In fact, the exchange rate doesn't seem to have hit 50 until over twenty years later.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

What's your point?

[tuckerman]

I think this is the definition of extreme (absolute) poverty vs poverty.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf166/aconf166-9.htm

[industriousthou]

Oh, it's totally poverty. Just not extreme poverty.

[witty_username]

Well, if you have a home and can cook food 400 Rs/day isn't too bad. (With 100 Rs you can get some vegetables more than a kilo of rice) Buying from a food stall is going to be somewhat more expensive than cooking food yourself. And food stall prices vary depending on quality of the food.

Also, poverty definitions vary.

EDIT: 400 Rs/day = 12000 Rs/month which isn't horrible.

[isolate]

I think the emphasis is on the word "extreme", kind of like critically endangered vs. just endangered for wildlife.

[shalmanese]

The reason why it's $1.90 is because extreme poverty was pegged at a dollar per day by the World Bank in 1993 which has risen due to inflation to $1.90. There's nothing magical about the number, it simply provides a convenient baseline for comparisons to be made.

[rco8786]

You forget that the US is an extremely expensive place to live relative to countries like India and China where enormous %s of the world population lives. $1.90 goes a long way in those places.

[bayesianhorse]

It depends on the living standards...

$1.9 doesn't afford you a comfortable life anywhere, but in the developing world, it's enough to not fear starvation. And that fear is a big part of being "extremely poor".

[john_butts]

Ah yes, not immediately dying. The mark of a not too poor.

[industriousthou]

Yes, this is exactly the distinction you seem to be having trouble with.

[deelowe]

The definition of not living in extreme poverty is literally "not ... dying."

[bayesianhorse]

"Fear of starvation", not "fear of immediate starvation"...

And I did not say this is the only problem with poverty.

[aaron695]

You'll have to google it for the different sides to the story and opinions on whether it should have been raised to $1.90, but here's a start -

http://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/international-pov...

PS You need to do the shopping, or learn to cook, $1.90 is very easy to feed people. But obviously it also about other things like food security and important stuff like happiness.

[spdionis]

US is not the only country in the world...

[Tuna-Fish]

> Why even have such a measure unless it's going to be at least $10/day as one likely needs at least that much just to feed themselves the cheapest possible food they can find.

Out of touch much? While studying, I fed myself with about $10-15 a week, and I ate better quality food than most people. I live in a place where food is more expensive than the US.

You can buy the calories you need per day for individual cents, if you buy potatoes in bulk. Above that, buy basic ingredients in large quantities, and you will have plenty of money left for fresh greens to top off you meals. Don't eat meat in every meal, and meat should always be a flavoring, not what makes up most of the meal.

[industriousthou]

I guess I could get by on $1.90 per day for food in the US if I had to, but it would really suck.

But the article is about extreme poverty. People who don't know if they're going to survive the next week or month. In the developing world, $1.90 per day provides just enough security that you're pretty sure you won't starve next week.

It's pretty damn bleak, but the fact is that a lot of people live in conditions where they know they may starve in the near future, and if fewer people live in those conditions, that's important.