Thus would per capita GDPs match, I'd expect twice as many poor...
No, because then the level of poverty would have been different, see. ;) That's the problem with that kind of measurement.
and that's not considering differences of measurement and unaccounted-for factors (like stuff the French poor get for free but the US poor have to pay for, say, healthcare).
Right. Which is why I before use HDI is variable, because it does take those factors into account. And United States are in place 8 and France in Place 16.
Both high enough to be practically the same in a global perspective. Which is my point. Poverty isn't caused by having a choice in pension schemes, or having private pensions. No matter of wriggling and juggling with facts is going to change that.
Nope, the level of poverty in Jérôme's graph is absolute (current US poverty line, read the caption). If you increase French per capita GDP to the US level, more Frenchmen will move across the US poverty level.
I before use HDI is variable, because it does take those factors into account
No, it doesn't take them into account. Check the formula. And again, HDI is not a measure of poverty rates.
To repeat the point you avoided, not only is the ratio of poor people much higher in the USA even if we use an absolute income threshold, but the French-US difference is even stronger if we add the virtual value of for-free public services available to the poor. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
