It's also ignoring the fact that we have already surpassed the limitations of what the nitrogen cycle could normally provide. So we would still be relying on fertilizers produced with fossil fuels.

Well, thanks for sharing misinformation.

Meanwhile, in the actual study (provided free via any search engine of your choice):

Also directly from the study you didn't read:

"It is important to understand that the DLS represents a minimum floor for decent living. It does not represent a an aspirational standard and certainly does not represent a ceiling. However, it is also a level of welfare not currently achieved by the vast majority of people. A new paper by Hoffman et al finds that 96.5 percent of people in low- and middle-income countries are deprived of at least one DLS dimension."

So no, nobody is coming to take your gaming rig, and no, the majority of people on Earth would get an UPGRADE in living conditions, not a downgrade.

Here is a link if you cannot access a search engine.

Thank you, dumb me missed it. Their paper talks a lot about measuring poverty. Earlier research showed poverty in China being high in the 80s under socialism and decreasing in the 90s when they became more capitalist. But the formulas for calculating that involved the prices of all consumer goods, including things like airline tickets, cars, big TVs, etc. But If you take these authors' approach and ignore the prices of things poor people never buy, the math shows poverty being very low in the 80s and rising dramatically in the 90s, because introducing more capitalism brought down the cost of middle-class and luxury goods but increased the cost of the basics.