The difference between rich and poor countries in Salg

Zengin countries have made up of 212 times more social assistance per person according to poor countries to reduce the impact of unprecedented economic shock. The report published on July 1, 2021 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) shows that cash aid policies significantly decreased the number of people who may fall into poverty during coronavirus outbreak. The report titled ‘Determining of oxygenation’ offers new data on how social aid expenditures prevent people from getting over poverty. 80 percent of people who will fall under the poverty limit of 1,90 dollars in 41 countries where the data is available (15 million people from 15 million to 12 million) left under this limit as a result of social assistance measures. The impact of social aid policies in the same 41 countries was avoided when they were measured in higher poverty limits (i.e. for those who provide a daily $ 5.50 or less income in these countries), since March 2020, 31 million of people from 42 million people.

No loss in low income group
]
] According to the report, the total reduction effects are strong, but because more rich countries can spend more for social protection measures, this effect is largely high and limited to countries in the upper-mid income group. Social assistance expenses in countries located in the lower-middle income group remain insufficient in preventing the increase of poor number of people, countries in the low income group have never avoided their income losses. “Corporate virus epidemic has triggered the implementation of unprecedented number of new and mostly innovative social protection measures. These measures include social aid expenses that play a critical role in keeping people away from poverty. But access to this can juice depends on where we live. Because the rich countries have spent more than 212 times per person compared to poor neighbors in relation to social protection during the global outbreak, the UNDP President Achim Steiner said: “The challenging task now has expanded financial possibilities to implement and maintain social aid spending measures that have proven to be a highly cost-effective method to save people from falling to poverty. “

There is a huge difference in future support]
The current data reveals that there are very big differences in income support applied by rich and poor countries to reduce poverty. Despite spending a total of 2.9 trillion dollars in social protection policies across the world, developing countries could only divide 379 billion dollars. Countries in the high income group, while allocated average $847 per person for all social protection policies (social assistance and insurance), countries in low and medium income groups spent only 124 dollars per person. In countries with low income group, total social protection expenditure per person falls up to 4 dollars. Writers who use current forecasts (reminent 117 million to 168 million people) during the global outbreaking, one step further, and how social aid expenses affect these numbers in reality.

Two different outlet routes from the conventional secretion]
] According to the study, if the temporary foundation income had been applied to all the poor and fragile households in developing countries, in the world, people who have been overgrown in the period of pandemi could also be avoided. The projections included in the report show that only 0.5 percent of Gayri Safi Milli Hasila can be achieved by separateing the measures related to income support for six months.. UNDP Chief Economist George Gray Molina said: “Rapor offers ideas on how global epidemic affects poor and fragile households in emerging countries, as well as how important policy choices are to reduce the effects of increased poverty. Some countries that are poorer could effectively alleviate poverty growth, this fact showed that it is possible to move even under important limitations and uncertainties. However, the main thing is that the countries in the low income group do not have access to strong social aid programs, which indicates that there will be two different straightout routes from the global outbreak. "