In a different example, a Buddhist monk in Thailand may take a vow of poverty, earn $0 a day, but nonetheless be well-supported by the community. This is why a qualitative definition like the one cited above ("a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services") is probably a better way to define poverty than a dollar amount.

A homeless person in a civilized country has access to a lot more than the actual cash represented by that $1.90. Many times they have access to free water, food, shelter, even medical care. These could be worth hundreds normally.

This should be obvious even without the book. :)