The official photo shows a marked fall compared to 38.1% of the second semester of 2024 and 52.9% of the first semester of that year, when the initial adjustment and the price shoot had beaten strong. The destitution also retreated at 6.9%. For the Casa Rosada, it is the proof that the deflation and the recomposition of income begin to be noticed in their pocket. For the opposition, it is a fragile and “drawn” improvement.
According to this percentage, between 14.5 and 15 million people do not cover the basic basket. The map is unequal: Patagonia appears with lower levels and the NEA and the conurbano among the highest. Childhood remains the most beaten group, which reveals that relief does not yet pierce the toughest cores of exclusion.
The controversy in the social network X started before the report came out and exploded with the first graphics. The journalist Nancy Pazos questioned the coherence of the data against what shows prices, rentals and changas. He wrote: “The inflation that the Indec does not record. I bought an Adidas do football ball for a month. On August 29. It cost me $ 39,000. Today for the same application and the same seller I wanted to buy another. $ 59,000. 51% increase !!! in 27 days !!!”.
For his part, Senator Martín Barrionuevo said methodological repairs and asked to review with magnifying glass the relationship between the income that people declare and the cost of the baskets. Attaching a graphic, the Correntino wrote: “Supposedly, according to INDEC, these were the increases in black wages in relation to blank salaries. In this way, ‘millions of poverty came out.’ Statistical bias, if not the drawing, is grotesque.” The graph showed that black salaries had gained a lot to those who are blank, when there is no reason for that to happen. Is the data false?
The common warning of most economists: not to confuse a statistical “rebound” with an improvement that is sustained over time.
Key to understand the number: INDEC measures income poverty. It compares what enters a home with the cost of the total basic basket. If for a few months the wages rise a little more than prices -because inflation is lowered or better pearly, poverty falls. If inflation accelerates again or the basket pastes a jump, it can rise again. It is not a measurement of “all” deficiencies (housing, education or health), but of the purchasing power.
Even with the decline, emergencies persist: unstable informal employment, educational gaps and unequal access to services. The ruling emphasizes that it is the lowest level in seven years and a point of political inflection. Critics remember that the photo can change quickly if there is another run. Between them, there is a clear conclusion: poverty fell and orders public discussion, but the challenge is to transform that short -term relief into a real and lasting improvement.
