[LockeWatts]

Incidentally, when I said "live on less than the average poor American", I meant in terms of material consumption. I have no car (75% of poor Americans do). I can't drink the water coming out of my tap. I have a small living space.

Americans believe everyone should have basic things like sanitation. Arguing that the poor somehow shouldn't just because India hasn't been as successful at infrastructure development isn't really a good argument.

[yummyfajitas]

I made no argument, I merely asked a question.

To be explicitly clear, the question is this: Suppose there are concrete negative consequences to having ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted income below $14,500/year. What are those consequences? Why don't middle class Bulgarians and upper middle class Indians suffer them?

(I overemphasize the phrase "ppp-adjusted" since you, llllllllllll, and many other people in other threads seem to repeatedly ignore it.)

[LockeWatts]

Suppose there are concrete negative consequences to having ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted ppp-adjusted income below $14,500/year.

That doesn't need supposition. They exist.

What are those consequences?

Not having adequate supplies of nutritious food, potable water, shelter from elements\other people, and access to information.

Why don't middle class Bulgarians and upper middle class Indians suffer them?

Well, A) they do, and B) ppp adjusted, $14,500 isn't upper middle class India or middle class Bulgaria.