> I'm not sure how accurate the methodology is to come up with the specific budget that produces the number "sixteen" here, but broadly speaking, it seems extremely likely that the number is no longer "three"
If we assume that general inflation captures the right basket of goods, and that (3 × minimum food) was correct in 1963, then what is actually done (adjusting the result in 1963 by inflation) is correct as well.
That is not what you would get if you computed the minimum food budget now and multiplied by 3; the shifting of the food share of the budget is captured in the CPI.
If we assume that general inflation captures the right basket of goods, and that (3 × minimum food) was correct in 1963, then what is actually done (adjusting the result in 1963 by inflation) is correct as well.
That is not what you would get if you computed the minimum food budget now and multiplied by 3; the shifting of the food share of the budget is captured in the CPI.