Among the many abnormalities that the Argentine economy has, there is one that is accentuated every year: stagnation. Since 2012, the GDP has undergone major shocks: increases that actually recovered the ground requested in the previous months and abrupt falls amid adjustments to balance the macroeconomic chaos. The average of all these years (13) is very close to the stationary point, but if we consider that the Argentine population grew in this period at a rate of 1.2% annually, we will be able to preserve the sad record of a slide in slight decline.. The balance of so many years with a lethal mixture of high inflation, job insecurity and low growth turned the country into a hothouse of poverty.
The check. But what is striking about these figures is their comparison with other countries in the region and even with other previous periods. Unfortunately, the income measurements that the INDEC carries out through its Permanent Household Survey (EPH) since 1993 for Greater Buenos Aires and since 2001 for the entire urban area. After the organization was normalized in 2016 after the “statistical blackout” generated by the intervention and the measurement methodology was refined, as of 2017 the two most relevant indices that emerge from the EPH were once again known: the level of poverty and the level of indigence. Both are built with a basket of goods compared to the average income of that same sample, which already covers the most populated cities in the country..
It is likely that until the first hyperinflation, recorded just half a century ago (the “Rodrigazo” of July 1975), the poverty threshold was between 5% and 10% of the total, but it began to climb substantially until the other two hyperinflations (1989 and 1990), after several years with a CPI above 100% annually. The other variable that weighs in the determination is salary income and employment status, since registered (formal) positions, both public and private, are the ones that generate the best income.
Measurement. The last measurement (31.6% poverty and 6.9% indigence) which corresponds to the first half of this year, appeared in the middle of the electoral campaign and the crack could not escape. Although this decline was foreseeable, it fell in the middle of the electoral final stretch and was used by the ruling party to show a very positive result of its management, but also by the opposition sectors to question its use and even the validity of the measurement.
These figures represent a significant reduction compared to the 52.9% poverty rate and 18.1% indigence recorded a year ago, that is, the drop is undeniable. This time, the drop in poverty and indigence is mainly explained by the situation in the Buenos Aires suburbs where the poverty rate went from 59.7% to 35.3% and the indigence rate from 22.7% to 8.8%.
Since the index draws a line between people who are poor and those who are not, it does not mean that everyone above that line is “rich.” For example, in August of this year, a typical family (two adults and two minors) needed an income of $1,160,780 to avoid falling below the poverty line, which corresponds to the Total Basic Basket (CBT), a value that increased 1% compared to the previous month and 23.5% year-on-year. To measure poverty, the Basic Food Basket (CBA) is taken, which in that month cost $520,529
During August 2025, the monthly variation of both the basic food basket (CBA) and the total basic basket (CBT) was 1.0%. The CBA and the CBT accumulated increases of 15.8% and 13.3% respectively during the year, and both registered interannual variations of 23.5%. According to data from Argentine Social Debt Observatory of the UCA (ODSA), monetary transfers (AUH and Alimentar Card) were one of the main factors that explained the year-on-year reduction in indigence.
The measurement of the EPH is carried out through a survey on a sample that represents 29.9 million inhabitants (urban centers) and is delivered every six months. However, to project your results and estimate the monthly valuation, the Di Tella University elaborate the Poverty Nowcastwhich was anticipating the result of this INDEC measurement. The researcher Martin Gonzalez Rozada comes to the crossroads of the criticisms that have appeared: the sample is representative of a population of 30 million inhabitants and “The basket based on the ENGHo2004/2005 that has been used since 2016 was used in all measurements since that year with the same methodology and basket, so they are comparable over time”. To conclude, he attributes the fact that some questions have gained momentum to the electoral political situation.
An x-ray. The Argentine Catholic University Through the ODSA, it analyzes the situation of people in situations of social vulnerability and the effective policies to attack it. It also prepares a poverty index but, unlike the official one, it adds other variables to income, so its measurements usually have a higher poverty threshold. Its director, Agustín Salvia, commented on the drop in the EPH index but pointed out a methodological issue that this measurement has been dragging on for some time. “In contexts of high volatility, both due to strong increases in prices and the slowdown in inflation, the measurement of poverty by income fails to adequately capture these changes; much more so if during the process, alterations took place in the price structure and in the income measurement instruments” underlines. Although the fall in poverty is real, it suggests that its magnitude is overrepresented by the measurement because it uses indigence and poverty thresholds based on basic baskets that respond to a structure.outdated consumption culture: the devaluation, price liberalization and increase in service rates increased this distortion. Even so, he concludes that even with these observations, the improvement process was real but it seems to be hitting a floor of about 30% that will be very difficult to overcome and that would confirm the hypothesis that in the long period of instability and stagnationor, poverty was rising by ever ascending steps.
What’s coming Along the same lines, the economist Jorge Colinapresident of IDESA points out that the poverty rate remains above that of 2017 (27%), a year before the inflationary acceleration began due to the exchange rate crisis of 2018. But it suggests addressing the issue by analyzing the sources of income of families in the most vulnerable situation. According to the INDEC household survey, informal work is the main source of income for 30% of families with the lowest income, that is, poor households. On average, informal work contributes 45% of total family income and formal work is much less important, only 22% of the total. In his opinion, the abrupt drop observed in the first semester shows the extent to which the persistence of high inflation plunges the population into poverty. But for the improvement to be sustainable there must be sufficient growth to increase the demand for registered work in the private sector. “A circle where it begins with stability, continues with investment that demands more employment, which, in turn, must be pushed with friendlier labor laws, continues with the hiring of workers and better education, so that people are more prepared for that challenge.”, he concludes.
When the limit is so close to many people, any oscillation sets off the alarm and increases the measurement. Preventing the economy from entering a situation of perfect storms with some regularity is useful but not enough. The battle is almost daily.
