The professor compared how the world dealt with the consequences of a pandemic: three countries stood out

At the beginning of the presentation, talking about the distribution of the tools, the teacher divided them into three groups. According to him, they can be classified according to where they were directed. He highlighted measures for companies that have allowed business continuity and basic services, measures for workers and measures for citizens.

Later, he said, the methods used in the world to combat the virus were divided into 6 more categories.

As explained by Mr. Guogis, the first makes it possible to distinguish between temporary cash benefits. They were paid regularly, for a defined period of time, and they were introduced in many countries.

The second category included lump sums, in which countries applied special lump sums to vulnerable groups in special cases related to health care costs, job loss, etc. Also, during the pandemic, the amount of benefits that already existed in the countries increased, for example, as the example provided, doubling the period of benefits paid, etc.

The fourth category includes the fact that countries with a pandemic struggled to pay benefits before their regular payment date, most of the time, as mentioned, this concerns pension recipients. They were paid the day before due to the increased risk of viruses in congested payment centers.

In addition, as noted, many countries have introduced anti-poverty benefits.

“In these cases, income and asset tests have been reduced and paperwork and other administrative conditions have been alleviated,” said the professor.

As a sixth category, the way in which countries handled the coronavirus was highlighted as an extension of the scope of existing benefits. Some countries have included previously excluded groups in their benefits, broadening the benefit base.

“I just want to say that the sample of foreign literature that I studied gave me an impression of three countries: Finland, Uruguay and New Zealand,” said the professor.

According to him, New Zealand is, by and large, a typical and liberal country, but currently has a government led by Labor, which during the first and second waves handled the crisis well, both in terms of medicine, economics and social policy and protection. .

“Interestingly, New Zealand spent 4% of GDP on social needs, while Australia, which is a country, spent only 1%. GDP,” he compared the response of countries to the pandemic.

It is true that Finland, according to Guogio, also distinguished itself because its system was able to withstand the crisis even before the virus.

“It is a typical country of the welfare state model, which already had well-developed welfare systems before the pandemic, both for social security and health.

All they had to do was enter three new measures, since all the others were already there. This shows that the State prepared itself in advance and its system was able to withstand it, ”said the professor.

He named Uruguay as the last country. Although you are assured that it is an often overlooked country, its medical care is the best in all of South America.

“What I got stuck in was the shopping cart for the poor and the provision of stamps for certain foods. Also, benefits for older workers during a pandemic, like sickness benefits.

You can say that those countries faced the challenges during the first and second pandemics, ”he said.

In general, A. Guogis also discussed the idea of ​​a welfare state. In his opinion, it was this pandemic that gave a great impetus to its further development.

“Ideas of the welfare state return to everyday politics, theory, and practice.

We see that globalization has slipped and nation-states have gained more importance than before and that the neoliberal attack on the welfare state has come to an end, as everyone has seen the importance of the state in the world. At least in a short time, the State has become the most important institutional element among other structures ”, summarized the professor.

Delfi recalls that during the LMT-supported project, researchers from Vilnius University and Mykolas Riomeris University conducted an analysis of the unemployment and poverty situation during COVID-19 and provided recommendations to Lithuania. The research group was led by prof. economist Romas Lazutka.