“Cake for everyone” is not enough
The generation of the baby boom We have grown up immersed in a mythical belief: significant economic growth is necessary to eliminate poverty. Only with a very large pie can there be enough slices for everyone. This metaphor has been a recurring theme in speeches. The idea of "making the pie bigger so everyone can eat" has been part of the Spanish political discourse throughout the democratic era as the best way to reduce poverty and increase general well-being. This logic is particularly invoked in debates against proposals that prioritize redistribution without prior growth.
That's why I find President Illa's reflection at the recent Círculo de Economía conference so relevant, when he lamented that Catalonia's strong economic growth hasn't managed to reduce poverty. For a prime minister to dare to point this out at an economic forum, breaking with broad political tradition, is the way to put the issue on the agenda, where it belongs. Because although the Catalan economy grew by 3.6% in 2024, poverty was not reduced proportionally, and according to the Third Sector Roundtable, 25% of the Catalan population remains at risk of social exclusion, a figure that has remained stable for the past fifteen years. Job insecurity is also increasing. According to ECAS, the rate of working poverty in Catalonia is 10.4%, and unemployment stands at 9.1%, indicating that having a job no longer guarantees escape from poverty. As economist Thomas Piketty points out, current inequalities are close to those of the 19th century: the wealth generated by the economy is often concentrated in the hands of a few people, without reaching the entire population.
The first step to change is always awareness, so the evidence that economic growth does not automatically translate into improved well-being for the entire population is welcome. Rising housing costs, job insecurity, and a lack of social investment and transformative public policies are the factors preventing the reduction of inequalities at this historic moment.
But we would be mistaken if we focused solely on the economy to reverse the situation. Economic and social policies are inseparable and feed off each other. Without a clear and decisive push for psychosocial policies, it will be impossible to reduce poverty and inequality.
Poverty is not only based on economic factors, but also involves social, cultural, emotional, and relational factors that influence how people experience, perceive, and cope with their situation. This can lead to poverty and make it difficult to escape situations of exclusion, even when redistributive economic policies are in place.
As early as 1917, Mary Ellen Richmond, founder of the first method of psychosocial intervention, established the importance of analyzing both the person and their environment in order to act effectively. Subsequently, psychologists and social workers such as Florence Hollis and Mary Woods updated and expanded the classic model, adapting it to new social and healthcare contexts. They emphasize the need to act in parallel in various areas.
At the same time as we work on training (especially in the age of artificial intelligence), personal skills, and emotional competencies, it is essential to strengthen social and community support networks, which foster social cohesion and a sense of belonging, elements that help break isolation and generate social capital. Combating aporophobia—the widespread "phobia of the poor"—is also necessary to minimize the negative effects of stigmatization and self-stigma associated with poverty. If we do not raise awareness in society about social inclusion through education and active participation, it will be difficult to break the cycle of poverty.
In addition to a big pie, a comprehensive strategy is needed that combines economic measures with psychosocial interventions to address both the structural causes and the emotional and social effects that perpetuate exclusion. We need a holistic approach with deep recognition and empathy, which is often lacking.