And excuse the cynicism - but the reduction of the part of the population for such countries will be a kind of "relief", because mostly old, chronically ill people who are the basis of the social load on the state budget and on the budget of families where these people live will die... Yes, it sounds very harsh, but this is the real "mathematics of life"
This is ridiculous logic. I normally spend most of my time between Singapore and India. The former can be described as a developed nation, while the latter is a part of the third world. Singapore is doing pretty well despite the pandemic. There was no large scale loss of jobs, and the economy is doing pretty well. On the other hand, the middle-class and lower-class in India is the worst affected. They are barely surviving now. The government is handling the situation pretty well, and if that was not the case it would have been much worse in India.
Ok, let's say. Explain - an unemployed Indian from the lower caste who collected waste, and lives on the income from renting it, for $ 1 a day, without financial obligations, what has he lost?
But the one who has, even a small business, has lost - lost clients, lost income, but has COSTS (rent, loans, tax liabilities, etc.)
Therefore, the picture is just not the same as you imagine - the poor really have nothing to lose ... Therefore, countries with a low standard of living and a high level of poverty objectively incur fewer losses ...