Half a billion more people at risk of poverty

The effects of the pandemic will go, it is now safe, beyond the health emergencies, which represent the most immediate needs; however, health needs are already in competition with pure survival needs, such as having food to eat. Even if due distances are also occurring in western countries, situations already comparable to similar problems typical of the third world are taking place. For some workers who do not enjoy union rights, because they are employed in working situations on the margins of production processes, also from a legal point of view, the absence of work means the immediate lack of sustenance, which obliges them to resort to voluntary organizations or worse, to lean on the sectors of the underworld that are quick to occupy the spaces that are created also due to the absence of the state. There are forecasts that say that the state of poverty will affect about half a billion people, a figure that adds only those who will see their condition deteriorating to a situation of poverty and that, in this dramatic accounting, they will have to add to the approximately seven hundred thousand people who they are already below the poverty line. The pandemic, therefore, brings back the fight against misery for at least thirty years and reveals the embarrassing unpreparedness of both the rich and poor states, as well as of course the supranational organizations: all committed to the pursuit of the objective, almost exclusively economic, to short term, without adequate preparation for unexpected events and planning worthy of facing events such as what we are experiencing. Despite the advanced state of technology, never so far in human history, the perception is that of an inability spread throughout the world political class, capable of endangering already dangerously unstable balances from a social point of view. Of course the disaster comes from afar, neoliberalism has produced many damages, the first of which, the ever increasing inequality, is then responsible for the current situation. Yet this situation must be defused in some way: the first question is the public debt of poor countries, on which specific reasoning must be made, but which must go in the direction of cancellation, at least partially. In the current pandemic context, these debts are not sustainable for economies already proven by underdevelopment and deny the possibility of creating new markets or maintaining the current ones. We must take due account of the danger of the compression of world trade, because it means a decrease in production and an increase in unemployment: a spiral of recession that can be endless. At the same time, the richer markets must be maintained, minimizing the danger of falling spending. Only financing plans spread widely, up to businesses, families and individuals, can manage to achieve these objectives; however, the penetration of financing must not be indiscriminate by eliminating those who already have capital in their possession from these policies to an extent that does not justify aid. It would be even worse to direct funding towards those higher incomes with the justification to feed the market in a stronger way: this theory has already failed many times and is responsible for the current inequality. Without massive funding, especially aimed at the poorest sectors, one cannot but meet the forecasts of the International World Fund, which speaks of a potentially worse situation than that of the crisis of 1929 and which provides for a partial recovery only in 2021. These data they speak of a possible worldwide job loss estimated at 1.25 billion if 3.3 billion total workers. It is a social bomb that can also have repercussions in relations between states, opening up to diplomatic crises which are very dangerous.