What happened with Guyana? I thought they were having an oil boom.
edit* before getting hung up on narratives I'm trying to look into the sources and 1: not finding much data, and 2: starting to suspect the map maker mixed up Guyana and Suriname, which doesn't have a source listed, nor can I find any reason for its sudden large drop in poverty when its gdp appears to be on the decline lately in contrast with Guyana's very sharp rise.
Yup I think they mixed up Guyana and Suriname.
I know people from Suriname and they are still in a recession for more than 10 years.
Meanwhile Guyanas economy is skyrocketing because of oil.
I'm a Surinamese and I know quite a few Guyanese.
We have to take into account a few things:
1. Poverty is relative and not absolute
2. Suriname's level of development is years ahead of Guyana
3. Guyana's GDP doesn't actually reflect their citizens wealth
Let's start with point number 1. Poverty is relative...
Every country has their own definition of what poverty is and what isn't. Surinamese their definition of poverty is vastly different from what poverty is in Guyana, Trinidad, Jamaica or whatever. In this case "What I see as poverty, doesn't have to be poverty to you". For example, in some countries not owning a car doesn't mean you're poor per se. It can be that the country has a good public transport system and that one doesn't feel the need to own a car. However in Suriname taking public transport and not owning a car is seen as something of the lower class, even though Suriname has a decent public transport system. Car = wealth in Suriname.
And this is relativity can be seen in the way Guyanese look at Suriname. On TikTok, YouTube and what ever, you can view many Guyanese their opinions on Suriname and Surinamese and they see us as the "wealthy" country, even though, Suriname's economy is in a recession. They think our cars, our homes etc. are really nice. They think the fact that we can buy alcohol so easily is a sign of wealth. If you want proof I can link some YouTube videos. But those things, aren't signs of wealth for Surinamese per se. 'till today, many Surinamese still see Guyana as a country on the poor side. This ties into point number two.
Suriname's level of development is years ahead. Suriname has always, since the 60's, been more developed than Guyana. Guyana only got "rich" since their oil boom in 2020. You can't expect them to just get ahead of Suriname in just 5 years. There is at least a 5-10 year gap in terms of level of development.
Just search up any video of Georgetown and you'll see the difference with Paramaribo. Paramaribo is much more developed. Even the supermarkets in Suriname are larger and nicer built and have much more goods, mostly European.
Surinamese companies overall are much more wealthier too and have way more experience in many industries and sectors. For example for steelwork construction it was so that at least up to 2022 Suriname supplied Guyana with materials. The same with other things. Knowledge wise Surinamese education institutions are also ahead and have more access to tools and materials available; sometimes due to ties with the Netherlands too. This then ties in to point number three.
Guyana's wealth doesn't reflect the wealth of their citizens. The living standards due to the oil boom, is now at the level of Manhattan. Lots of foreign cash coming in, expats getting all high ranking jobs and taking up all housing and put lots of strain on the food supply of the country. Their citizens haven't been able to keep up with this, even salaries haven't. That's why for many Guyanese life is hard and expensive and that results in poverty. As I said, you can't expect them to just catch up in 5 years time to Suriname. Search up on TikTok, YouTube and such and you'll see how many Guyanese sometimes travel to Suriname, just because goods are "cheaper" here. So much so that I'm surprised sometimes, because to us they're expensive.
>I know people from Suriname
Another thing I wanna point out is the fact that Surinamese like to "complain". I think this is one of the "Dutch traits" we inherented /s...complaining about everything. Complaining about the recession, complaining about how hard life is, complaining about the weather...lol...complaining about literally the craziest inconvenience that actually isn't an inconvenience.
We are in a recession, but still people spend money like crazy, eat out every weekend and continue life as it is. I always say, the government is broke and in a recession, but the citizens aren't broke haha. So the reality is often different than what people "complain" about and is reflected in official numbers.
u/Ponicrat
That's amazing. I think probabilty 90% of people in Europe aren't even aware of the existance of Suriname. I live in Italy and I never heard of news coming from this country. Thank you for those details.
I think most people are aware of Suriname because of all the great Dutch footballers they produce. Many Dutch players of Surinamese descent famously played in Italy too - Seedorf, Davids, Gullit, Rijkaard, Kluivert, etc.
We've always called it Suriname, after the indigenous people called the Surinen, and the -ame is a local suffix for river, as the country surrounds that river.
But the name never was Dutch Guiana. If you do a quick Google Search, you'll see that Dutch Guiana never exited. Suriname's official name was always Suriname. Dutch Guiana was a collection of colonies of which the colony of Suriname was one, but the name was always Dutch Guiana. It was called as such later, in analogy to British Guiana and French Guiana.
This map is not about relative poverty. The limit is right there in the image.
Recession is not about government or people being broke or not. Itās about growth.
>This map is not about relative poverty. The limit is right there in the image.
Yes the graph has provided an absolute value, but in my comment I didn't respond to the graph per se. In this case I responded more to the fact that between countries and also organisations, the definition can sometimes vary. "What I see as poor, doesn't have to be poor to you"; that's why poverty is relative. For example the US' official poverty rate was 11%, but other organizations have a different definition and therefore place the number much higher.
So never take poverty rates as an absolute value. Suriname itself also has another definition of poverty rates btw. This graph doesn't reflect the Surinamese rate. We rate ourselves way worse.
>Recession is not about government or people being broke or not. Itās about growth.
My statement was a bit of a joke...lol...
Yes the graph has provided an absolute value, but in my comment I didn't respond to the graph per se. In this case I responded more to the fact that between countries and also organisations, the definition can sometimes vary. "What I see as poor, doesn't have to be poor to you"; that's why poverty is relative. For example the US' official poverty rate was 11%, but other organizations have a different definition and therefore place the number much higher.
So never take poverty rates as an absolute value. Suriname itself also has another definition of poverty rates btw. This graph doesn't reflect the Surinamese rate. We rate ourselves way worse.
When a poor country (especially in a dictatorship) has little natural resources, the only resource the ruling class can enrich themselves from is human capital. For this you need at least moderately healthy and educated citizens and half-decent infrastructure. When oil is suddenly put into play, all the ruling class has to do is sell the extraction rights to enrich themselves.
In addition if the entire economy is reliant on immediate oil revenues, a fluctuation in market value can destroy your economy over night. Sudden drop in value and 99% of your exports being petroleum products means disaster.Ā
It's why the Norwegians invested all the money and diversified their economy.Ā
With an undeveloped or corrupt nation there isn't usually this level of long term thinkingĀ Ā
Certain powers want those resources and will heavily interfere in your countries politics, install a shitty puppet leader that benefits them, populace eventually gets tired and a civil war starts, same shit with loads of oil rich countries in the MENA and Africa.
... Look, you don't need to make up the staff to say that Western countries took many many atrocious decisions in the rest of the world.
The term "Resource curse" was invented for the Netherlands once they discovered fossil fuel. The problem was that the money from fossil export didn't stay in the country and was spent on imports. Imports drove away the domestic industry, which wasn't a problem as long as the price was right. Then it suddenly wasn't and the Netherlands discovered that what become the engine of their economics failed.
And no it wasn't because of foreign interference (what a surprise?).
Itās worse, because even if local politicians donāt want to sell it, bigger nations will still interfere and just fund their guys in the country to get into power even if itās through a coup, and then the small, resource rich country is stuck with a shit sell out dictator for the next few decades who will barely develop the country.
Not so far though. HDI and per capita income have both been growing incredibly fast since 2019 in Guyana. The source for this map does not corroborate the data being presented
it is probably this, guyana's population is around 800,000 so even if a few thousand venezuelans with no job/status come into the country the stats will really get thrown off.
Oil is extremely profitable. And because of that oil industry quickly dominates economy leaving other sectors underdeveloped. And that hurts population, ruin countries, etc.
They invest oil profits in development in other sectors of economy. And countries that used this money to just buy whatever they lack instead of building their own industries didn't age well - Colombia, USSR, Arabs of northern gulf shore.
While the companies almost certainly do well (otherwise why would they have invested in the venture in the first place), the Guyanese Government also is making good money, and that there is an increase in jobs for average Guyanese as well. You seem to be taking an ideological position rather than looking at the facts...
Extreme poverty as defined by the UN is earning less than $2.15/day. You can live in some very unpleasant conditions earning twice that, especially in places like SA where consumer goods are expensive.
The other comment is wrong. It's not about how much you earn, but how much you spend. You can earn nothing and spend thousands of dollars a day, if you have them.
If you spend less than $2.15 a day to survive, you are indeed in extreme poverty.
Only 12% of Venezuela's population living in extreme poverty in 2019? That's weird, since the Venezuelan economy was bursting that year and there was even a plummet in the population growth due to mass emigration. What's even more bizarre is that Venezuela is having an extreme spike in poverty rate growth right now when I suppose the economy (ie. The oil industry) starts to recover after the massive crash of 6/7 years ago.
Those numbers definitely seem weird. Venezuela is doing much better now in 2024 than it was in 2019.
2017 to 2019 was full-on starvation mode in Venezuela. It was absolutely horrible. Things started to get a bit better in 2020 until around 2022, when it kind of plateaued into a weird stability.
I know, but what's the point for the Venezuelan government to inflate the poverty rate? I mean, there's no way the 2024 poverty rate can be higher than the 2019 one.
My guess is the 2019 figures are outdated and show the data from like 2015. But thatās the issue with this āgovernmentā, any official statistics are a fucking mystery and just shouldnāt be taken into consideration
TLDR Venezuela should be considered as āno dataā in any statistics map
There you have the product of more than 2 decades of the Ibero-American left in action (with all its arrogance, tendency to self-destructiveness and complete absence of self-criticism).
With the other two notorious examples being Cuba and Nicaragua.
It amazes me that youāre getting downvoted. Hey people, you can be a social democrat and hate the populist authoritarian bullshit that is Chavez and Maduro. You donāt have to defend them just because they pretended to have good intentions while they sucked oil slush funds dry
Too many western (American) people on the left have no fucking clue about what actual leftism looks like in practice and just reflexively defend anything that isnāt right-wing capitalism because they think people like Maduro are trying to achieve Scandinavian style social-democracy when they decidedly arenāt.
Yeah, the American school system didn't equip them with critical thinking, causing them to just uncritically support because of what they claim to be, not what they actually are.
Hey, that's not the worst thing, it seems that the people who throw downvotes at me don't know how to argue or don't have anything to argue or refute me with, besides that unfortunately there are more than one who even convinces himself that neither Cuba nor Nicaragua nor Venezuela are autocracies/dictatorships De Jure or De Facto.
For heaven's sake, are you kidding me?
The crisis was already starting to manifest itself in 2012/2013 in case you weren't aware, the economy was already in free fall/backward in 2014/2015 and the first economic sanctions of any relevant kind wouldn't start to fall until 2016/2017.
Besides you show quite a bit of ignorance about economics if you seriously think inflation can be imposed on another country from outside.
They do not give a single indication or evidence that the sanctions triggered the crisis since that would be ignoring the timeline of events.
Dismissed.
I didn't say they triggered, I only said the economic collapse of the country is not only due to "leftism" but also western countries placing sanctions of the people of Venezuela.
Here in Italy there was a famous journalist who said "La sinistra ama cosƬ tanto i poveri che quando va al potere li aumenta di numero" (The left loves so much poor people that when he ascend to power he increases them)
It was sarcastic, but when it comes to Venezuela that sentence fits to perfection.
Jeez yeah like there was absolutely no other cause of Venezuela collapsing into poverty. Not like some all huge country nearby sanctioned all their trade so no other country in the world can trade with them, made it impossible for them to sell their oil to the world and spent the last ten years trying to coup their government. Oh wait, no that did all happen, actually.
Proof of this?
None that is either verifiable or supports the inquiry?
It so happens that For Your Information, the crisis began to manifest itself in 2012/2013, the economy was already in free fall/bursting in 2015/2016, and the first noticeable sanctions came in the 2016/2017 span, NOT before.
That is ridicolous. Gheddafi's Libya was hit with harsher sanctions in the 90's but it never collapsed in a disastrous situation like Maduro's Venezuela during that period of time. Venezuela's oil production is shrinking since 2000, what do you think would have happened when the 2000s spike in oil price would have ended?
It makes sense, given that if they did indeed want to lift people out of poverty, then the formerly poor would be left with no reason to vote for the political left and thus would be left with no voter base.
>With the other two notorious examples being Cuba and Nicaragua.
Aside from all the issues they went and still going through due to externalities starting with the US, I guess you'd rather propose the US backed Batista and the US backed Contra terror instead? Because those were the literal alternatives.
Literally, the embargo only affects and concerns the relations between Cuba and the United States; while Cuba has more than 50 bilateral agreements or deals with many countries such as Red China, Canada, India, Iran, Turkey, most of Latin America and even countries of the European Union such as France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
And funny that you put the word "terror" and "Batista" in the same sentence since Batista was not trying to overthrow all the governments of Latin America to parasitize their natural resources as the Cuban dictatorship has been doing since 1959.
>Literally, the embargo only affects and concerns the relations between Cuba and the United States
It does not, as it literally bars other countries and firms and legal persons of other countries from commerce with Cuba.
>And funny that you put the word "terror" and "Batista" in the same sentence
I put the Contra and terror into same phrase, not Batista regime while, of course, Batista regime was also conducting repression also including the terror tactics. Nevertheless, it was the US-backed, financed and armed Contra terror that US had been found guilty of by the International Court of Justice.
>since Batista was not trying to overthrow all the governments of Latin America to parasitize their natural resources
Yep, it was notoriously the US of all countries. Batista was the US henchmen for the US to do so in Cuba.
Again, white lie, that only affects when you deal with Cubans who use property expropriated without compensation from Americans during the Cuban Revolution.
So you mean the human rights history of the Cuban dictatorship since 1959 has been not only the same but even worse?
LMAO the vast majority of those US-backed coups in Latin America came as a response to Castro's Cuba's attempts to overthrow all governments in the region to forcefully impose its Revolution through subversive guerrilla warfare.
>Again, white lie, that only affects when you deal with Cubans who use property expropriated without compensation from Americans during the Cuban Revolution.
I'm not sure if you're genuinely misinformed and cannot care to even do a quick search or outright lying.
>So you mean the human rights history of the Cuban dictatorship since 1959 has been not only the same but even worse?
If you're genuinely believing that Batista regime was better, then you're a wee bit lost in your propaganda.
>LMAO the vast majority of those US-backed coups in Latin America came as a response to Castro's Cuba's
No, lol. US backed regime changes and the US backed dictatorships had been a thing way before that, and Cuban revolution itself was a direct response to that. Vast majority of the US-backed coups, US-backed terror and CIA operations either had nothing to do with Cuba or Cuban influence was trivial.
Seeing that you can't even cite from memory the specific nature of the embargo or exactly what or who it is directed at, it seems that the one who is uninformed here is not me, but you who in your entire life have not done any in-depth research on the embargo and only prattle on about the views of some government sympathetic to the Cuban dictatorship or of some leftist or ultra-leftist media.
The current Cuban exile community did NOT exist before 1959, and this is a fact.
Nor were Cubans throwing themselves into the sea in precarious rafts and dinghies to flee the Batista dictatorship as they have been doing since 1959; and this is a HARD FACT.
Hahahahaha, the coups before WWII were carried out by a combo between a fruit company and the Yankee government, it was not the CIA since it did not exist yet, genius.
And I see that the interference of the Cuban dictatorship was so severe in the rest of Latin America via guerrilla subversive groups that you can't even defend them if you don't try again uselessly to shift the focus to the Yankees, but that won't do you any good.
They also happen to have an embargo designed to starve them. It is hard to separate what is doing what. American embargo and economic warfare or leftist policies.
That is a big fat lie you have there, since food and medical supplies were NEVER subject to the Embargo, not even when it was at its hardest, such as during the Ronald Reagan Administration or during the Clinton Administration.
And if the above were true then the rest of the Castro family would have absolutely none of the luxuries they enjoy while they have the island turned De Facto into a giant personal Castro Ranch and where they treat the population as if they were their serfs or cattle.
And that sector of the economy has been deeply intervened by the government for quite some time (for 2 decades now), as well as practically ALL the important and relevant sectors of the Venezuelan economy; so do not pretend to exempt the dictatorship from responsibility for the economic meltdown since 2013.
I guess Itād would be much easier assign blame to the populist policies of Chavez/Maduro without the economic warfare coming from the USA.
You may be living inside the USA bubble of distorted information provide by the State Dpt
You are literally talking to someone who experienced firsthand the meltdown of his home country's economy in real time as it was happening thanks to self-destructive and plundering socialist policies, you arrogant dumbass.
You really won this argument with that insult at the end. Huh?
You also happen to be talking with somebody born a raise there, who didnāt belong to the moneyed class (sifrinos?).
You are not final authority on all things Venezuela. The economic embargo on Venezuela is a provable fact. The number I cited is verifiable data. You sound a like the Vnz diaspora who fled to Miami to make common cause with Castroās gusanos.
100% sure this is Fake, i know at the bottom they wrote sources and that it's adjusted to PPP, Inflation etc. but these Maps about Poverty in South America are seemlingly created by the same person ''BrasilEmMapas'' and they never link sources. Anyone can write a credible looking text on the bottom of a Map.
1. How did you get Data for 2024 when the official Data by World Bank is usually from 2022, there is always a significant time lag in the Data publishing and the year 2024 is still going.
2. Bare in mind how insanely low ''less than $2.15 a day adjusted to PPP'' is and it means that if not adjusted to PPP (Cost of Living), these $2.15 in PPP would be around $0.50 to $0.80 in most developed countries, since goods and services in those countries are generally cheaper, they can buy more and therefore have a higher Purchasing Power Parity. The rates for Venezuela, Guyana, Argentina are outlandish.
3. Looking at the World Bank website ([Here](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY)), in 2022 the country with the highest rate is Zambia at 64%, in Syria it was 25%. You telling me in 2024 Argentina is at 17.5%, only a bit lower than Syria in 2022? And so much higher than Paraguay, Bolivia, Ecuador and Colombia which are quite poor countries even for Latin American standards. Bangladesh was at 5% in 2022 btw.
4. World Bank has data only for Urban areas in Argentina ([Here](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?name_desc=false&locations=AR)), where over 92% of the Population lives. Most recent data from 2022 says Extreme Poverty is on a down turn since the Pandemic, falling from 1.2% in 2020 to 0.6% in 2022. An increase by over 2900% in 2 years? No chance,
5. [Here<](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-in-extreme-poverty?tab=chart&country=BRA~Argentina+%28urban%29~VEN~ECU~COL~BOL~CHL~GUY~PRY~PER) is also a long term chart about Extreme Poverty, notice the numbers on this Map for most countries (Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile) are identical or nearly identical as the numbers from the World Bank who publish the data on extreme poverty.
6. Most recent data for Guyana is from 1998 and it was 11.9% back then, they are much more developed now than in 1998, 35% in 2024 just makes no sense.
7.Most recent data for Venezuela is from 2006 back when the economy was doing much better, it was 7.1% which is was relatively high for a decent economy, over 50% in 2024 still seems fake though, especially because there is no recent data on Venezuela, in nearly all instable or inaccessible countries the data is old, 1998 for Turkmenistan, 2009 Papua New Guinea, 2014 Yemen, Palestine 2016, Haiti 2012, Madagascar 2012, Myanmar 2017 etc. and no data for Cuba, Afghanistan, Libya, North Korea, Eritrea, Somalia.
Feel free to correct if i made some mistakes.
I don't have any data about poverty rates in SA. But regarding your comment about Argentina's situation, are you aware of their ongoing economic crisis?
The USD to Peso Argentino exchange rate when from ~60 pesos per USD by the end of 2019, to 900+ pesos now. Of course this doesn't prove the data in OP's map are correct, but it makes it less outlandish.
i know but average wage in $ in Argentina didn't went down by 15x just because it went from 60 Peso to 900 Peso. The same for example in Turkey with high inflation and devaluation of the currency. For example in Argentina minimum wage at the start of 2022 was 32k Pesos per month, back then about $310 and now it's 203k Pesos or about $220. It's a big decline in $ terms but not as shocking as one might assume when looking at Peso devalution which went from 100 to 910 during the same time. $220 a month would be $7.3 per day, adjusted to PPP even $15.3.
The Data presented on this Map doesn't add up with other data points about Argentina or when looking at Extreme poverty in other countries and using official data. For example Argentina's GDP per capita adjusted to PPP in 2024 is estimated at $26.4k, slightly lower than in 2023 but still relatively high compared to many other countries: [Data](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD).
And according to [Statista<](https://www.statista.com/statistics/950903/average-salary-latin-america-by-country-2020/), avg monthly wage after Tax was $423 in Arg in 2023, it's not much but not super low either and doesn't even cover the informal economy which is large there and most other developing countries. Adjusted to PPP, $423 are $890 per month or nearly $30 a day. I know there's lots of inequality in ARG (like in many other places) but it again makes it impossible to believe that nearly 1/5 of the population has <$2.15 a day in PPP.
Argentina born in 1816. Started to have inflation's serious issues around 1946-1955 and since that, always it's been prone to inflate prices.
Corruption, well, the country always has been corrupted at different rates in all its history.
And the people decides to vote extreme right.
Extreme poverty December 2023 = 11.5%
Extreme poverty July 2024 = 17.5%
Poverty December 2023 = 41.7%
Poverty July 2024 = 55.5%
A big part of this increase in poverty is the changed exchange rate. It wonāt show in the official statistics, but the official exchange rate in Argentina was bullshit. If you go to the right place (i.e. everywhere), you could 3 times as many pesos for a single dollar than the official exchange rate would tell.
It has nothing to do with exchange rate, it's about purchase power of the people, ergo people can buy less than 6 months ago, the president repeated this phrase several times that the worst part would be until April, and it's taking longer.
Extreme right bots are overtaking Reddit and the entire internet and downvoting basically anything that shows that things aren't right, it's a known deal, but I'll keep showing data. Data doesn't lie.
What do you think the purchasing power parity is calculated with? The official exchange rate. What do you think was heavily distorted the last years and completely disconnected with reality? The official Argentine exchange rate. Your idea of it having nothing to do with the exchange rate just shows you donāt know how purchasing power is calculated.
As for āthe worst part until Aprilā, the objective fact here is that inflation has slowed down a lot since December. Moreover, deflation would be idiotic policymaking everywhere in the world (which is why every government in the world tries to avoid it) so decreasing overall prices is what nobody should want.
And true, data doesnāt lie. The problem with data is when people donāt understand the matter behind the data, they are misinterpreting what the data says, as you are doing.
NO, it is calculated with the price of the basic stuff, extreme poverty taking only food and primary stuff, last year 11.5% basically couldn't afford to get food every day, and now sits at 17.5%. NO RELATED AT ALL WITH EXCHANGE RATE.
You're talking on a subject you have no idea at all, please stop embarrasing yourself.
Inflation is calculated with the price of stuff. When you compare poverty across nations (which is done here), you calculate this with the purchasing price parity, which inherently uses the exchange rate. The graph itself literally says it is using purchasing power parity!!!!!!!!
You genuinely have literally no idea what youāre talking about and apparently cannot read.
Again, extreme poverty have nothing to do with inflation, you're mixing things.
In December you were able to buy 100 loafs of bread with your Pesos salary.
From December to July you got some inflation + salary increases most likely.
In July you are able to buy 70 loafs of bread with your new Pesos salary.
That's how poverty and extreme poverty is calculated. Inflation, salary increases, exchange rate are not calculated at all, just purchase POWER. I can see that it's something that you don't understand, I'll block and ignore you, please ask ChatGPT if you still don't understand.
Venezuela and Argentina both had a massive spike. Also, both counties are experimenting with extreme (albeit opposite) ideologies.
Lets see how this plays out several years down the line.
!remindme 5 years
Argentina is being led by a nuttter, but the extreme measures seem to have at least gotten inflation under control. Itās going to be tough for the people in the short term, but hopefully liberalization of the economy brings back the wealth that country should have.
Uruguay is much more consistently the 'good' outlier than Chile, and for much more time. They already had a very established welfare state back in the 1960s, when we Chileans were just starting to fix infantile malnutrition, which is more or less the first step.
Thanks for educating me on this. I don't have much knowledge about South America as it rarely featured in our discussions back in my home country and only recently I began learning about it and somehow Chile was always mentioned by people and articles etc.
What a American centric left liberal sub human comment. Everything has to be about Trump doesn't it? Everyone has to be judged on whether they are closest to trump or not?
Argentina and Venezuela are stabilizing, at least, Should reduce in the future. The map maker probably mixed Suriname and Guyana, as pointed out in another tweet.
What i am curious about is Peru, they nearly tripled their numbers.
I know, manito, it is similar to what happened here in the 90s, although the current political situation in Argentina seems way more polarized than Brazil's 90s.
However, if even Venezuela managed to achieve some level of stabilization, i have hopes for you guys. Independently of who is in power, Argentina's economy do have a chance to rebounce.
Argentine poverty statistics definition is more stringent but broader than the rest of Latin American countries and the United States, that's why there is a "statistical inflation" on extreme poverty rates in Argentina.
I know Argentine has been going through some hard times lately (Mileiās controversial policies notwithstanding) and was no longer the preeminent economy on the continent that it used to be, but I have a hard time accepting that things gotten so much worse that it beats not only a developing country famous for favelas, but does so by several times.
Looking at the numbers from countries like Paraguay, Brazil and Bolivia, and compare it with Argentina. This map is more fake..Ā Ā
Brasilemmapas: Brazilian, His nationality was known.Ā Ā
There is no way in hell that Argentinaās extreme poverty is worse than Brazilās, much less *three times* as bad. This has to be using insanely different standards by nation.
Itās converted by the official exchange rate between Argentinian Pesos and USD. Value of the currency collapsed during that time and real value of Argentine Pesos is much lower
What happened with Guyana? I thought they were having an oil boom. edit* before getting hung up on narratives I'm trying to look into the sources and 1: not finding much data, and 2: starting to suspect the map maker mixed up Guyana and Suriname, which doesn't have a source listed, nor can I find any reason for its sudden large drop in poverty when its gdp appears to be on the decline lately in contrast with Guyana's very sharp rise.
Yup I think they mixed up Guyana and Suriname. I know people from Suriname and they are still in a recession for more than 10 years. Meanwhile Guyanas economy is skyrocketing because of oil.
I'm a Surinamese and I know quite a few Guyanese. We have to take into account a few things: 1. Poverty is relative and not absolute 2. Suriname's level of development is years ahead of Guyana 3. Guyana's GDP doesn't actually reflect their citizens wealth Let's start with point number 1. Poverty is relative... Every country has their own definition of what poverty is and what isn't. Surinamese their definition of poverty is vastly different from what poverty is in Guyana, Trinidad, Jamaica or whatever. In this case "What I see as poverty, doesn't have to be poverty to you". For example, in some countries not owning a car doesn't mean you're poor per se. It can be that the country has a good public transport system and that one doesn't feel the need to own a car. However in Suriname taking public transport and not owning a car is seen as something of the lower class, even though Suriname has a decent public transport system. Car = wealth in Suriname. And this is relativity can be seen in the way Guyanese look at Suriname. On TikTok, YouTube and what ever, you can view many Guyanese their opinions on Suriname and Surinamese and they see us as the "wealthy" country, even though, Suriname's economy is in a recession. They think our cars, our homes etc. are really nice. They think the fact that we can buy alcohol so easily is a sign of wealth. If you want proof I can link some YouTube videos. But those things, aren't signs of wealth for Surinamese per se. 'till today, many Surinamese still see Guyana as a country on the poor side. This ties into point number two. Suriname's level of development is years ahead. Suriname has always, since the 60's, been more developed than Guyana. Guyana only got "rich" since their oil boom in 2020. You can't expect them to just get ahead of Suriname in just 5 years. There is at least a 5-10 year gap in terms of level of development. Just search up any video of Georgetown and you'll see the difference with Paramaribo. Paramaribo is much more developed. Even the supermarkets in Suriname are larger and nicer built and have much more goods, mostly European. Surinamese companies overall are much more wealthier too and have way more experience in many industries and sectors. For example for steelwork construction it was so that at least up to 2022 Suriname supplied Guyana with materials. The same with other things. Knowledge wise Surinamese education institutions are also ahead and have more access to tools and materials available; sometimes due to ties with the Netherlands too. This then ties in to point number three. Guyana's wealth doesn't reflect the wealth of their citizens. The living standards due to the oil boom, is now at the level of Manhattan. Lots of foreign cash coming in, expats getting all high ranking jobs and taking up all housing and put lots of strain on the food supply of the country. Their citizens haven't been able to keep up with this, even salaries haven't. That's why for many Guyanese life is hard and expensive and that results in poverty. As I said, you can't expect them to just catch up in 5 years time to Suriname. Search up on TikTok, YouTube and such and you'll see how many Guyanese sometimes travel to Suriname, just because goods are "cheaper" here. So much so that I'm surprised sometimes, because to us they're expensive. >I know people from Suriname Another thing I wanna point out is the fact that Surinamese like to "complain". I think this is one of the "Dutch traits" we inherented /s...complaining about everything. Complaining about the recession, complaining about how hard life is, complaining about the weather...lol...complaining about literally the craziest inconvenience that actually isn't an inconvenience. We are in a recession, but still people spend money like crazy, eat out every weekend and continue life as it is. I always say, the government is broke and in a recession, but the citizens aren't broke haha. So the reality is often different than what people "complain" about and is reflected in official numbers. u/Ponicrat
That's amazing. I think probabilty 90% of people in Europe aren't even aware of the existance of Suriname. I live in Italy and I never heard of news coming from this country. Thank you for those details.
I think most people are aware of Suriname because of all the great Dutch footballers they produce. Many Dutch players of Surinamese descent famously played in Italy too - Seedorf, Davids, Gullit, Rijkaard, Kluivert, etc.
Never heard of any of them
You must have been born after 1995, then. These guys won the Champions League with Ajax in the 90s.
Just refer to it by its proper name Dutch Guiana š
We've always called it Suriname, after the indigenous people called the Surinen, and the -ame is a local suffix for river, as the country surrounds that river.
But the name never was Dutch Guiana. If you do a quick Google Search, you'll see that Dutch Guiana never exited. Suriname's official name was always Suriname. Dutch Guiana was a collection of colonies of which the colony of Suriname was one, but the name was always Dutch Guiana. It was called as such later, in analogy to British Guiana and French Guiana.
This map is not about relative poverty. The limit is right there in the image. Recession is not about government or people being broke or not. Itās about growth.
>This map is not about relative poverty. The limit is right there in the image. Yes the graph has provided an absolute value, but in my comment I didn't respond to the graph per se. In this case I responded more to the fact that between countries and also organisations, the definition can sometimes vary. "What I see as poor, doesn't have to be poor to you"; that's why poverty is relative. For example the US' official poverty rate was 11%, but other organizations have a different definition and therefore place the number much higher. So never take poverty rates as an absolute value. Suriname itself also has another definition of poverty rates btw. This graph doesn't reflect the Surinamese rate. We rate ourselves way worse. >Recession is not about government or people being broke or not. Itās about growth. My statement was a bit of a joke...lol...
>Poverty is relative and not absolute This graph refers to an absolute value though.Ā
Yes the graph has provided an absolute value, but in my comment I didn't respond to the graph per se. In this case I responded more to the fact that between countries and also organisations, the definition can sometimes vary. "What I see as poor, doesn't have to be poor to you"; that's why poverty is relative. For example the US' official poverty rate was 11%, but other organizations have a different definition and therefore place the number much higher. So never take poverty rates as an absolute value. Suriname itself also has another definition of poverty rates btw. This graph doesn't reflect the Surinamese rate. We rate ourselves way worse.
Exactly
finding oil in a developing country is a death sentence in the long run, which is especially clear in equatorial guinea
Aka the āresource curseā https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/resource-curse.asp
Dutch disease too
Why is that?
When a poor country (especially in a dictatorship) has little natural resources, the only resource the ruling class can enrich themselves from is human capital. For this you need at least moderately healthy and educated citizens and half-decent infrastructure. When oil is suddenly put into play, all the ruling class has to do is sell the extraction rights to enrich themselves.
In addition if the entire economy is reliant on immediate oil revenues, a fluctuation in market value can destroy your economy over night. Sudden drop in value and 99% of your exports being petroleum products means disaster.Ā It's why the Norwegians invested all the money and diversified their economy.Ā With an undeveloped or corrupt nation there isn't usually this level of long term thinkingĀ Ā
Certain powers want those resources and will heavily interfere in your countries politics, install a shitty puppet leader that benefits them, populace eventually gets tired and a civil war starts, same shit with loads of oil rich countries in the MENA and Africa.
I don't fully buy into the systematic interference... Greed is often enough to explain a lot
... Look, you don't need to make up the staff to say that Western countries took many many atrocious decisions in the rest of the world. The term "Resource curse" was invented for the Netherlands once they discovered fossil fuel. The problem was that the money from fossil export didn't stay in the country and was spent on imports. Imports drove away the domestic industry, which wasn't a problem as long as the price was right. Then it suddenly wasn't and the Netherlands discovered that what become the engine of their economics failed. And no it wasn't because of foreign interference (what a surprise?).
Fair, that makes sense and we can see it happening in many rich gulf countries, even though interference is also another factor.
Thatās a lot of words to say that local politicians will sell out their country to the highest bidder.
Itās worse, because even if local politicians donāt want to sell it, bigger nations will still interfere and just fund their guys in the country to get into power even if itās through a coup, and then the small, resource rich country is stuck with a shit sell out dictator for the next few decades who will barely develop the country.
Ask yourself, would your gouvernment start caring more or less about you if it were to be suddenly financed from the outside?
Not so far though. HDI and per capita income have both been growing incredibly fast since 2019 in Guyana. The source for this map does not corroborate the data being presented
Mismanaged revenue. A classic.
Venezuelan refugees, maybe?
it is probably this, guyana's population is around 800,000 so even if a few thousand venezuelans with no job/status come into the country the stats will really get thrown off.
Having oil doesnāt mean the economy will be better. Look at Venezuela
Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, BP, etc. they get all the profits, the Guyanese government gets relatively little in return to pass onto its people.
That wouldn't explain why more people would be in poverty than before. Oil might not benefit the population, but I don't see how it could hurt them.
Oil is extremely profitable. And because of that oil industry quickly dominates economy leaving other sectors underdeveloped. And that hurts population, ruin countries, etc.
It's really not that simple. Look at the gulf Arabs or Norway
They invest oil profits in development in other sectors of economy. And countries that used this money to just buy whatever they lack instead of building their own industries didn't age well - Colombia, USSR, Arabs of northern gulf shore.
I mean, I get oil = bad. But I still don't really think this is the causation.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
GDP per capita has no relevance to whether people are living in poverty or not. Most won't see a single penny of that oil money.
Yup, oil curse.
While the companies almost certainly do well (otherwise why would they have invested in the venture in the first place), the Guyanese Government also is making good money, and that there is an increase in jobs for average Guyanese as well. You seem to be taking an ideological position rather than looking at the facts...
The old measurement might have been inaccurate
It happens that they had an oil bomb,
I have a REALLY hard time believing that not even 2% of Paraguayās population lives in extreme poverty. Iāve seen some gnarly conditions there
Extreme poverty as defined by the UN is earning less than $2.15/day. You can live in some very unpleasant conditions earning twice that, especially in places like SA where consumer goods are expensive.
>Extreme poverty as defined by the UN is **earning** less than $2.15/day. Not earning, but spending. You can earn nothing and still be rich
So if I am unemployed then I am extremely poor by the un standards?
The other comment is wrong. It's not about how much you earn, but how much you spend. You can earn nothing and spend thousands of dollars a day, if you have them. If you spend less than $2.15 a day to survive, you are indeed in extreme poverty.
Similar things to be said for Bolivia amd Brazil.
Only 12% of Venezuela's population living in extreme poverty in 2019? That's weird, since the Venezuelan economy was bursting that year and there was even a plummet in the population growth due to mass emigration. What's even more bizarre is that Venezuela is having an extreme spike in poverty rate growth right now when I suppose the economy (ie. The oil industry) starts to recover after the massive crash of 6/7 years ago.
Those numbers definitely seem weird. Venezuela is doing much better now in 2024 than it was in 2019. 2017 to 2019 was full-on starvation mode in Venezuela. It was absolutely horrible. Things started to get a bit better in 2020 until around 2022, when it kind of plateaued into a weird stability.
Never trust data from Venezuela, this coming from a Venezuelan
I know, but what's the point for the Venezuelan government to inflate the poverty rate? I mean, there's no way the 2024 poverty rate can be higher than the 2019 one.
My guess is the 2019 figures are outdated and show the data from like 2015. But thatās the issue with this āgovernmentā, any official statistics are a fucking mystery and just shouldnāt be taken into consideration TLDR Venezuela should be considered as āno dataā in any statistics map
They did not inflate the data, tthe other way around the 2019 data was obviously false and now the numbers arƩ more realistic
Man thatās some sad shit. 50%? Holy shit.
Yea but I would have expected that poverty rate in 2019, not in 2024
I guess. I donāt know.
There you have the product of more than 2 decades of the Ibero-American left in action (with all its arrogance, tendency to self-destructiveness and complete absence of self-criticism). With the other two notorious examples being Cuba and Nicaragua.
It amazes me that youāre getting downvoted. Hey people, you can be a social democrat and hate the populist authoritarian bullshit that is Chavez and Maduro. You donāt have to defend them just because they pretended to have good intentions while they sucked oil slush funds dry
Too many western (American) people on the left have no fucking clue about what actual leftism looks like in practice and just reflexively defend anything that isnāt right-wing capitalism because they think people like Maduro are trying to achieve Scandinavian style social-democracy when they decidedly arenāt.
Yeah, the American school system didn't equip them with critical thinking, causing them to just uncritically support because of what they claim to be, not what they actually are.
I agree, but for most people, their only exposure is Cuban Americans who lump the left in America with a step towards Castro.
Hey, that's not the worst thing, it seems that the people who throw downvotes at me don't know how to argue or don't have anything to argue or refute me with, besides that unfortunately there are more than one who even convinces himself that neither Cuba nor Nicaragua nor Venezuela are autocracies/dictatorships De Jure or De Facto.
Sure, it was only the left. The sanctions imposed on them played no part. How are you people even typing this without thinking?
For heaven's sake, are you kidding me? The crisis was already starting to manifest itself in 2012/2013 in case you weren't aware, the economy was already in free fall/backward in 2014/2015 and the first economic sanctions of any relevant kind wouldn't start to fall until 2016/2017. Besides you show quite a bit of ignorance about economics if you seriously think inflation can be imposed on another country from outside.
https://www.wola.org/2020/10/new-report-us-sanctions-aggravated-venezuelas-economic-crisis/
They do not give a single indication or evidence that the sanctions triggered the crisis since that would be ignoring the timeline of events. Dismissed.
I didn't say they triggered, I only said the economic collapse of the country is not only due to "leftism" but also western countries placing sanctions of the people of Venezuela.
Here in Italy there was a famous journalist who said "La sinistra ama cosƬ tanto i poveri che quando va al potere li aumenta di numero" (The left loves so much poor people that when he ascend to power he increases them) It was sarcastic, but when it comes to Venezuela that sentence fits to perfection.
Considering who that famous journalist was I'd take his quotes with a sack of salt.
Jeez yeah like there was absolutely no other cause of Venezuela collapsing into poverty. Not like some all huge country nearby sanctioned all their trade so no other country in the world can trade with them, made it impossible for them to sell their oil to the world and spent the last ten years trying to coup their government. Oh wait, no that did all happen, actually.
Proof of this? None that is either verifiable or supports the inquiry? It so happens that For Your Information, the crisis began to manifest itself in 2012/2013, the economy was already in free fall/bursting in 2015/2016, and the first noticeable sanctions came in the 2016/2017 span, NOT before.
That is ridicolous. Gheddafi's Libya was hit with harsher sanctions in the 90's but it never collapsed in a disastrous situation like Maduro's Venezuela during that period of time. Venezuela's oil production is shrinking since 2000, what do you think would have happened when the 2000s spike in oil price would have ended?
It makes sense, given that if they did indeed want to lift people out of poverty, then the formerly poor would be left with no reason to vote for the political left and thus would be left with no voter base.
>With the other two notorious examples being Cuba and Nicaragua. Aside from all the issues they went and still going through due to externalities starting with the US, I guess you'd rather propose the US backed Batista and the US backed Contra terror instead? Because those were the literal alternatives.
Literally, the embargo only affects and concerns the relations between Cuba and the United States; while Cuba has more than 50 bilateral agreements or deals with many countries such as Red China, Canada, India, Iran, Turkey, most of Latin America and even countries of the European Union such as France, Germany, Italy and Spain. And funny that you put the word "terror" and "Batista" in the same sentence since Batista was not trying to overthrow all the governments of Latin America to parasitize their natural resources as the Cuban dictatorship has been doing since 1959.
>Literally, the embargo only affects and concerns the relations between Cuba and the United States It does not, as it literally bars other countries and firms and legal persons of other countries from commerce with Cuba. >And funny that you put the word "terror" and "Batista" in the same sentence I put the Contra and terror into same phrase, not Batista regime while, of course, Batista regime was also conducting repression also including the terror tactics. Nevertheless, it was the US-backed, financed and armed Contra terror that US had been found guilty of by the International Court of Justice. >since Batista was not trying to overthrow all the governments of Latin America to parasitize their natural resources Yep, it was notoriously the US of all countries. Batista was the US henchmen for the US to do so in Cuba.
Again, white lie, that only affects when you deal with Cubans who use property expropriated without compensation from Americans during the Cuban Revolution. So you mean the human rights history of the Cuban dictatorship since 1959 has been not only the same but even worse? LMAO the vast majority of those US-backed coups in Latin America came as a response to Castro's Cuba's attempts to overthrow all governments in the region to forcefully impose its Revolution through subversive guerrilla warfare.
>Again, white lie, that only affects when you deal with Cubans who use property expropriated without compensation from Americans during the Cuban Revolution. I'm not sure if you're genuinely misinformed and cannot care to even do a quick search or outright lying. >So you mean the human rights history of the Cuban dictatorship since 1959 has been not only the same but even worse? If you're genuinely believing that Batista regime was better, then you're a wee bit lost in your propaganda. >LMAO the vast majority of those US-backed coups in Latin America came as a response to Castro's Cuba's No, lol. US backed regime changes and the US backed dictatorships had been a thing way before that, and Cuban revolution itself was a direct response to that. Vast majority of the US-backed coups, US-backed terror and CIA operations either had nothing to do with Cuba or Cuban influence was trivial.
Seeing that you can't even cite from memory the specific nature of the embargo or exactly what or who it is directed at, it seems that the one who is uninformed here is not me, but you who in your entire life have not done any in-depth research on the embargo and only prattle on about the views of some government sympathetic to the Cuban dictatorship or of some leftist or ultra-leftist media. The current Cuban exile community did NOT exist before 1959, and this is a fact. Nor were Cubans throwing themselves into the sea in precarious rafts and dinghies to flee the Batista dictatorship as they have been doing since 1959; and this is a HARD FACT. Hahahahaha, the coups before WWII were carried out by a combo between a fruit company and the Yankee government, it was not the CIA since it did not exist yet, genius. And I see that the interference of the Cuban dictatorship was so severe in the rest of Latin America via guerrilla subversive groups that you can't even defend them if you don't try again uselessly to shift the focus to the Yankees, but that won't do you any good.
They also happen to have an embargo designed to starve them. It is hard to separate what is doing what. American embargo and economic warfare or leftist policies.
That is a big fat lie you have there, since food and medical supplies were NEVER subject to the Embargo, not even when it was at its hardest, such as during the Ronald Reagan Administration or during the Clinton Administration. And if the above were true then the rest of the Castro family would have absolutely none of the luxuries they enjoy while they have the island turned De Facto into a giant personal Castro Ranch and where they treat the population as if they were their serfs or cattle.
Venezuela economy depends on oil revenues by like 80% and the import 90% of their food
And that sector of the economy has been deeply intervened by the government for quite some time (for 2 decades now), as well as practically ALL the important and relevant sectors of the Venezuelan economy; so do not pretend to exempt the dictatorship from responsibility for the economic meltdown since 2013.
I guess Itād would be much easier assign blame to the populist policies of Chavez/Maduro without the economic warfare coming from the USA. You may be living inside the USA bubble of distorted information provide by the State Dpt
You are literally talking to someone who experienced firsthand the meltdown of his home country's economy in real time as it was happening thanks to self-destructive and plundering socialist policies, you arrogant dumbass.
You really won this argument with that insult at the end. Huh? You also happen to be talking with somebody born a raise there, who didnāt belong to the moneyed class (sifrinos?). You are not final authority on all things Venezuela. The economic embargo on Venezuela is a provable fact. The number I cited is verifiable data. You sound a like the Vnz diaspora who fled to Miami to make common cause with Castroās gusanos.
100% sure this is Fake, i know at the bottom they wrote sources and that it's adjusted to PPP, Inflation etc. but these Maps about Poverty in South America are seemlingly created by the same person ''BrasilEmMapas'' and they never link sources. Anyone can write a credible looking text on the bottom of a Map. 1. How did you get Data for 2024 when the official Data by World Bank is usually from 2022, there is always a significant time lag in the Data publishing and the year 2024 is still going. 2. Bare in mind how insanely low ''less than $2.15 a day adjusted to PPP'' is and it means that if not adjusted to PPP (Cost of Living), these $2.15 in PPP would be around $0.50 to $0.80 in most developed countries, since goods and services in those countries are generally cheaper, they can buy more and therefore have a higher Purchasing Power Parity. The rates for Venezuela, Guyana, Argentina are outlandish. 3. Looking at the World Bank website ([Here](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY)), in 2022 the country with the highest rate is Zambia at 64%, in Syria it was 25%. You telling me in 2024 Argentina is at 17.5%, only a bit lower than Syria in 2022? And so much higher than Paraguay, Bolivia, Ecuador and Colombia which are quite poor countries even for Latin American standards. Bangladesh was at 5% in 2022 btw. 4. World Bank has data only for Urban areas in Argentina ([Here](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?name_desc=false&locations=AR)), where over 92% of the Population lives. Most recent data from 2022 says Extreme Poverty is on a down turn since the Pandemic, falling from 1.2% in 2020 to 0.6% in 2022. An increase by over 2900% in 2 years? No chance, 5. [Here<](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-in-extreme-poverty?tab=chart&country=BRA~Argentina+%28urban%29~VEN~ECU~COL~BOL~CHL~GUY~PRY~PER) is also a long term chart about Extreme Poverty, notice the numbers on this Map for most countries (Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile) are identical or nearly identical as the numbers from the World Bank who publish the data on extreme poverty. 6. Most recent data for Guyana is from 1998 and it was 11.9% back then, they are much more developed now than in 1998, 35% in 2024 just makes no sense. 7.Most recent data for Venezuela is from 2006 back when the economy was doing much better, it was 7.1% which is was relatively high for a decent economy, over 50% in 2024 still seems fake though, especially because there is no recent data on Venezuela, in nearly all instable or inaccessible countries the data is old, 1998 for Turkmenistan, 2009 Papua New Guinea, 2014 Yemen, Palestine 2016, Haiti 2012, Madagascar 2012, Myanmar 2017 etc. and no data for Cuba, Afghanistan, Libya, North Korea, Eritrea, Somalia. Feel free to correct if i made some mistakes.
I don't have any data about poverty rates in SA. But regarding your comment about Argentina's situation, are you aware of their ongoing economic crisis? The USD to Peso Argentino exchange rate when from ~60 pesos per USD by the end of 2019, to 900+ pesos now. Of course this doesn't prove the data in OP's map are correct, but it makes it less outlandish.
i know but average wage in $ in Argentina didn't went down by 15x just because it went from 60 Peso to 900 Peso. The same for example in Turkey with high inflation and devaluation of the currency. For example in Argentina minimum wage at the start of 2022 was 32k Pesos per month, back then about $310 and now it's 203k Pesos or about $220. It's a big decline in $ terms but not as shocking as one might assume when looking at Peso devalution which went from 100 to 910 during the same time. $220 a month would be $7.3 per day, adjusted to PPP even $15.3. The Data presented on this Map doesn't add up with other data points about Argentina or when looking at Extreme poverty in other countries and using official data. For example Argentina's GDP per capita adjusted to PPP in 2024 is estimated at $26.4k, slightly lower than in 2023 but still relatively high compared to many other countries: [Data](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD). And according to [Statista<](https://www.statista.com/statistics/950903/average-salary-latin-america-by-country-2020/), avg monthly wage after Tax was $423 in Arg in 2023, it's not much but not super low either and doesn't even cover the informal economy which is large there and most other developing countries. Adjusted to PPP, $423 are $890 per month or nearly $30 a day. I know there's lots of inequality in ARG (like in many other places) but it again makes it impossible to believe that nearly 1/5 of the population has <$2.15 a day in PPP.
Common Chile and Uruguay W.
Props to Suriname for going from 20% to 3% in 5 years
Oh, Argentina, weine nicht um mich
When you decide just having inflation is too boring and played out, so youāre gonna have a recession to spice things up.
I love reddit economists' take on how to fix a country that has been plagued by corruption and inflation since it's inception.
Yep. Itās their once a generation financial crisis. Nothing new to see here.
Having a deranged libertarian at the helm during this one might have something to do with that massive spike in extreme poverty though.
He just got the job. They were broke when he got there.
Argentina born in 1816. Started to have inflation's serious issues around 1946-1955 and since that, always it's been prone to inflate prices. Corruption, well, the country always has been corrupted at different rates in all its history.
And the people decides to vote extreme right. Extreme poverty December 2023 = 11.5% Extreme poverty July 2024 = 17.5% Poverty December 2023 = 41.7% Poverty July 2024 = 55.5%
6% = 2.8 million people. 13% = 6.1 million people.
A big part of this increase in poverty is the changed exchange rate. It wonāt show in the official statistics, but the official exchange rate in Argentina was bullshit. If you go to the right place (i.e. everywhere), you could 3 times as many pesos for a single dollar than the official exchange rate would tell.
It has nothing to do with exchange rate, it's about purchase power of the people, ergo people can buy less than 6 months ago, the president repeated this phrase several times that the worst part would be until April, and it's taking longer. Extreme right bots are overtaking Reddit and the entire internet and downvoting basically anything that shows that things aren't right, it's a known deal, but I'll keep showing data. Data doesn't lie.
What do you think the purchasing power parity is calculated with? The official exchange rate. What do you think was heavily distorted the last years and completely disconnected with reality? The official Argentine exchange rate. Your idea of it having nothing to do with the exchange rate just shows you donāt know how purchasing power is calculated. As for āthe worst part until Aprilā, the objective fact here is that inflation has slowed down a lot since December. Moreover, deflation would be idiotic policymaking everywhere in the world (which is why every government in the world tries to avoid it) so decreasing overall prices is what nobody should want. And true, data doesnāt lie. The problem with data is when people donāt understand the matter behind the data, they are misinterpreting what the data says, as you are doing.
NO, it is calculated with the price of the basic stuff, extreme poverty taking only food and primary stuff, last year 11.5% basically couldn't afford to get food every day, and now sits at 17.5%. NO RELATED AT ALL WITH EXCHANGE RATE. You're talking on a subject you have no idea at all, please stop embarrasing yourself.
Inflation is calculated with the price of stuff. When you compare poverty across nations (which is done here), you calculate this with the purchasing price parity, which inherently uses the exchange rate. The graph itself literally says it is using purchasing power parity!!!!!!!! You genuinely have literally no idea what youāre talking about and apparently cannot read.
Again, extreme poverty have nothing to do with inflation, you're mixing things. In December you were able to buy 100 loafs of bread with your Pesos salary. From December to July you got some inflation + salary increases most likely. In July you are able to buy 70 loafs of bread with your new Pesos salary. That's how poverty and extreme poverty is calculated. Inflation, salary increases, exchange rate are not calculated at all, just purchase POWER. I can see that it's something that you don't understand, I'll block and ignore you, please ask ChatGPT if you still don't understand.
Argentina makes me so sad, such a beautiful country hurt by poor leadership š¤¦š»āāļø Story repeated all over the Hispanic worldā¦
Theyāre starting to go on the up and up again, so hopefully by 2029 theyāll be back in the green
Thatās great to hear
Poor leadership? Reversing the Peronist rot doesnāt happen overnight.
Itās been a very long time
Colombia went up because of the Venezuelans who moved there.
Venezuela and Argentina both had a massive spike. Also, both counties are experimenting with extreme (albeit opposite) ideologies. Lets see how this plays out several years down the line. !remindme 5 years
Argentina is being led by a nuttter, but the extreme measures seem to have at least gotten inflation under control. Itās going to be tough for the people in the short term, but hopefully liberalization of the economy brings back the wealth that country should have.
Chile always amazes me. Outlier in that continent.
What about Uruguay?
Oops, didn't notice it. Yes, Uruguay too.
Uruguay is much more consistently the 'good' outlier than Chile, and for much more time. They already had a very established welfare state back in the 1960s, when we Chileans were just starting to fix infantile malnutrition, which is more or less the first step.
Thanks for educating me on this. I don't have much knowledge about South America as it rarely featured in our discussions back in my home country and only recently I began learning about it and somehow Chile was always mentioned by people and articles etc.
And what about Paraguay? 1.3% for a country that was always at the lower end in South America for human development is amazing.
Not even Messi can save ArgentiniansĀ
It's a messi down there.
And they just elected a literal Trumpist down there so it's only gonna get worse.
it was going to get worse regardless
What a American centric left liberal sub human comment. Everything has to be about Trump doesn't it? Everyone has to be judged on whether they are closest to trump or not?
I know what happened in Venezuela, but what happened in Argentina?
Peronism happened
And then extreme libertarianism. The one-two combo, one might say.
Argentina and Venezuela are stabilizing, at least, Should reduce in the future. The map maker probably mixed Suriname and Guyana, as pointed out in another tweet. What i am curious about is Peru, they nearly tripled their numbers.
Argentina isnāt stabilizing. We just entered a bad recession with no good news on the horizon. Iām lucky, but most people here are struggling.
I know, manito, it is similar to what happened here in the 90s, although the current political situation in Argentina seems way more polarized than Brazil's 90s. However, if even Venezuela managed to achieve some level of stabilization, i have hopes for you guys. Independently of who is in power, Argentina's economy do have a chance to rebounce.
Love how "people" are downvoting you, despite your statement being correct. Probably either butthurt libertarians or astroturf bots.
I suppose you can call rock bottom stable.
I mean, it is more or less what happens, unless you are in an eternal civil war.
One more time: different countries measure poverty differently.
lmao Venezuela. Remember when reddit shilled it as a socialist paradise
No surprise with Argentinians, there economy is about to burst
Bro it bursted 80 years ago and is still going on
Argentina is the opposite of the saying āwhat is dead may never dieā, they keep finding new ways to die.
Sometimes I think Argentina is the country that proves that White Supremacy is wrong...
It was wrong before that
Bro, what are you even talking about? Lol
Argentines tend to emphasize their (white) European-ness...
You have no idea at all
Argentine poverty statistics definition is more stringent but broader than the rest of Latin American countries and the United States, that's why there is a "statistical inflation" on extreme poverty rates in Argentina.
Grrr ARG
Surinam and its diamonds
Figure is due to the fact that value of the currencies of Argentina and Venezuela collapsed over that time period compared to USD
Surprised Paraguay is so low, I thought the living standards there were worse.
I know Argentine has been going through some hard times lately (Mileiās controversial policies notwithstanding) and was no longer the preeminent economy on the continent that it used to be, but I have a hard time accepting that things gotten so much worse that it beats not only a developing country famous for favelas, but does so by several times.
I've been in Argentina and I've been in Paraguay and Bolivia. Something definitely doesn't add up...
Pinochet constitution did a good job šš»
Looking at the numbers from countries like Paraguay, Brazil and Bolivia, and compare it with Argentina. This map is more fake..Ā Ā Brasilemmapas: Brazilian, His nationality was known.Ā Ā
BRASIL NĆMERO UM PORRA š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·š§š·
Let's see, some countries elect people like Trump, and some don't.
Pretty much Venezuela in a nutshell.
most regarded take I've seen all year
I think you meant āretardedā?
yes sir, you are retarded
There is no way in hell that Argentinaās extreme poverty is worse than Brazilās, much less *three times* as bad. This has to be using insanely different standards by nation.
Itās converted by the official exchange rate between Argentinian Pesos and USD. Value of the currency collapsed during that time and real value of Argentine Pesos is much lower
I'm wondering the same.Ā
Communism seems to working its magic in Venezuela
We have Messi the goat so no problem š«¶ Extreme /s
Argentine poverty rate definition is broader than the rest of the region or the United States.
Argentina what a shit show.
Venezuela was the richest country in South America. Then Bernie Bros took over.
I donāt see white explained on the colour scale, so Iāll assume the Falklands - just visible there - are zero.