@cost of living
The percentage, number, and distribution of families that are considered poor under federal poverty guidelines would change dramatically in many central cities
if regional differences in the cost of living were recognized. In high-cost areas on the East and West coasts, the poor population would increase substantially both in real and proportional terms. Cities like New York, NY and Los Angeles, CA rank among those with the greatest increases in both the number and proportion of poor families under COL- adjusted standards. However, cities in lower-cost areas of the South and West, such as El Paso, TX and Shreveport, LA, have among the largest declines in the number and share of poor families once living costs are taken into account.
Adjusting federal poverty guidelines for regional differences in the cost of living has a considerable impact on the number of families eligible for public programs. Overall, the share of families eligible for Early Head Start and Head Start as well as the National School Lunch Program would increase 29 percent in large cities across the country. San Francisco, CA, San Jose, CA, and Bridgeport, CT experience the largest increases in eligibility for these programs, while San Antonio, TX, Corpus Christi, TX, and El Paso, TX see the largest declines in the eligible population under COL-adjusted guidelines.
In my calculation, @70% of CA population live in San Fran Bay Area, Los Angeles metro,San diego Metro, and Sacramento metro.
Anecdotally, I haven’t ever seen so many people line up for gas for a meager 10-20C/gallon savings like in Bay Area, which is so unlike lower cost urban areas . The savings ironically, won’t even pay for one monthly burger meal at a fast food joint for most usual bay area commutes.