Who You Callin' Third World?

[happyrobert]

It would be interesting to learn what reader's personal definitions are of 1^st and 3^rd world countries. (We'll skip the second world countries for now.)

So, below are some "official facts" about three countries.

According to "experts", which of the below is/are 1^st world, and which is/are 3^rd world?

If you choose "incorrectly", should the definitions be redefined?

Facts below are soley about each country's economy. What other factors determine 1st or 3rd world status? Do they make a difference, or is it "all about the economy, stupid?"

Country A:

Well developed infrastructure and a free enterprise economy

POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LINE: 9.6%

GDP GROWTH RATE: 7.6% (2010)

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: 1.2%

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION GROWTH RATE: 14.5%

PUBLIC DEBT: 43% OF GDP

Country B:

Well developed infrastructure and a free enterprise economy

POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LINE: 12%

GDP GROWTH RATE: 2.7% (2010)

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: 9.7%

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION GROWTH RATE: 3.3%

PUBLIC DEBT: 88% OF GDP

Country C:

Well developed infrastructure and a free enterprise economy

POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LINE: 5.5%

GDP GROWTH RATE: -1.6% (2010) -7.2% (2009)

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: 13.7%

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION GROWTH RATE: 5%

PUBLIC DEBT: 94% OF GDP

[heybruce]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

[happyrobert]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

I didn't draw conclusions, Bruce. Just listed publicly available facts then asked you to draw conclusions. Indeed, I had listed GDP per person, but deleted it when it would have made the country easily identifiable. Sorry if you're stumped without it.

But you did kindly answer the other question I posed, to wit, what other factors contribute to status. Well done!

P.S. Please tell me a place on earth with "minimal" corruption and where I might source that statistic.

[smokie36]

I use simpler methods like is it safe to drink tap water? or are there open sewers? or do more than 10% of the population stand around the street all day doing nothing?

The real test for me though is the quality of the beer. If that's awful then I know I'm in a first world country and need to get on the next flight to Cambodia...

[chachachacha]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

[happyrobert]

I use simpler methods like is it safe to drink tap water? or are there open sewers? or do more than 10% of the population stand around the street all day doing nothing?

The real test for me though is the quality of the beer. If that's awful then I know I'm in a first world country and need to get on the next flight to Cambodia...

I would add Saigon, then. Their microbreweries are a real treat!

[happyrobert]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

Have you been to West Virginia, Arkansas, Tennesee?

[DP25]

I use simpler methods like is it safe to drink tap water? or are there open sewers? or do more than 10% of the population stand around the street all day doing nothing?

The real test for me though is the quality of the beer. If that's awful then I know I'm in a first world country and need to get on the next flight to Cambodia...

Ok, Cambodia has unsafe tap water, open sewers, 10% crippled or idle in the streets, ok...but good beer compared to Western countries? Cambodian beer isn't better than in any Western country

[lannarebirth]

1) Thailand , 2) America , 3) I'm guessing one of the "PIGS" nations.

[happyrobert]

1) Thailand , 2) America , 3) I'm guessing one of the "PIGS" nations.

You are correct with the first two.

What is a PIG nation?

[thaihome]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn’t put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

[lannarebirth]

1) Thailand , 2) America , 3) I'm guessing one of the "PIGS" nations.

You are correct with the first two.

What is a PIG nation?

Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain. They've got a few debt problems you may have read about. You could throw Japan in too.

[happyrobert]

1) Thailand , 2) America , 3) I'm guessing one of the "PIGS" nations.

You are correct with the first two.

What is a PIG nation?

Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain. They've got a few debt problems you may have read about. You could throw Japan in too.

A thinking man's man. Thank you. I will very much miss my Guiness.

Have you thought of trying out for Jeopardy? I hear it's coming to Thailand.

[happyrobert]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn't put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

I agree to a degree. It is the old system but the terms are still in common usage. But are the new terms truly much more accurate?

So would the States be underveloped or developing because of their staggering debt (and crumbling infrastructure)? Is Thailand developed because of low unemployment and low per capita national debt along with strong industrial growth?

Maybe we need new factors defined and new terms?

[chachachacha]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn't put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

Lets face it , New words are just spin . A new word don't change what poverty is

[happyrobert]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn't put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

Lets face it , New words are just spin . A new word don't change what poverty is

Poverty = No Guinness

[heybruce]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

I didn't draw conclusions, Bruce. Just listed publicly available facts then asked you to draw conclusions. Indeed, I had listed GDP per person, but deleted it when it would have made the country easily identifiable. Sorry if you're stumped without it.

But you did kindly answer the other question I posed, to wit, what other factors contribute to status. Well done!

P.S. Please tell me a place on earth with "minimal" corruption and where I might source that statistic.

Yeah right, you're trolling, though I'm not sure to what end. Choose your questions right and you can arrive at any conclusions. If you compare consumption of dairy products with cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products causes cancer. If you compare consumption of dairy products with longevity and cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products enables people to live longer, which increases their risk of cancer, which is primarily a disease of old age.

If you chose questions carefully, you can easily imply that Cuba, Zimbabwe, Burma and North Korea are paradise on earth. So why not add one more obvious question; are the borders controlled to keep people out or in?

BTW, corruption is difficult to measure, but Transparency International tries to do so. Do you want to introduce their measures into this discussion?

[smokie36]

I would add Saigon, then. Their microbreweries are a real treat!

Noted with thanks. :jap:

I use simpler methods like is it safe to drink tap water? or are there open sewers? or do more than 10% of the population stand around the street all day doing nothing?

The real test for me though is the quality of the beer. If that's awful then I know I'm in a first world country and need to get on the next flight to Cambodia...

Ok, Cambodia has unsafe tap water, open sewers, 10% crippled or idle in the streets, ok...but good beer compared to Western countries? Cambodian beer isn't better than in any Western country

My pont was it pisses all over its weathier neighbour sadly. Not only alcohol though Thailand needs to take its foot out ofits mouth and look outside the front door cos in 20 years time...well...

[happyrobert]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

I didn't draw conclusions, Bruce. Just listed publicly available facts then asked you to draw conclusions. Indeed, I had listed GDP per person, but deleted it when it would have made the country easily identifiable. Sorry if you're stumped without it.

But you did kindly answer the other question I posed, to wit, what other factors contribute to status. Well done!

P.S. Please tell me a place on earth with "minimal" corruption and where I might source that statistic.

Yeah right, you're trolling, though I'm not sure to what end. Choose your questions right and you can arrive at any conclusions. If you compare consumption of dairy products with cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products causes cancer. If you compare consumption of dairy products with longevity and cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products enables people to live longer, which increases their risk of cancer, which is primarily a disease of old age.

BTW, corruption is difficult to measure, but Transparency International tries to do so. Do you want to introduce their measures into this discussion?

None of my posts contain any statements that remotely resemble trolling. In civilized society, it's called sparking a discussion.

My "questions" that I chose "so carefully" were simple. Based on given information, which is 1st and which is 3rd world. Go from there...

Why do you keep asking the same question? As I mentioned in my original post, and also in a reply to you, yes, I'd be happy to hear other criteria. Feel free to introduce Transparency Internationals info/statistics into this discussion. It would be much more welcome than aggressive comments and unsubstantiated accusations.

If I'm trolling, I'm sure you have reported me, yes?

[jimbeam1]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

Have you been to West Virginia, Arkansas, Tennesee?

They are not Countries.

[craigt3365]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

If you've truly been to India, then you would know that statement is false. India has some of the worst slums in the world...and are far worse than anything here. And yes, I've been in the Klong Toey slums. Slummin' it as they say. But it was daylight out!

I tried to visit the favelas in Brazil, but couldn't get there as no taxi driver would take us close enough to walk! I did visit the slums in India...beyond belief.

[happyrobert]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

Have you been to West Virginia, Arkansas, Tennesee?

They are not Countries.

Uhhh, yea, but they are in a country. One that lays claim to 1st world status.

[heybruce]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

I didn't draw conclusions, Bruce. Just listed publicly available facts then asked you to draw conclusions. Indeed, I had listed GDP per person, but deleted it when it would have made the country easily identifiable. Sorry if you're stumped without it.

But you did kindly answer the other question I posed, to wit, what other factors contribute to status. Well done!

P.S. Please tell me a place on earth with "minimal" corruption and where I might source that statistic.

Yeah right, you're trolling, though I'm not sure to what end. Choose your questions right and you can arrive at any conclusions. If you compare consumption of dairy products with cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products causes cancer. If you compare consumption of dairy products with longevity and cancer rates you will conclude that consuming dairy products enables people to live longer, which increases their risk of cancer, which is primarily a disease of old age.

BTW, corruption is difficult to measure, but Transparency International tries to do so. Do you want to introduce their measures into this discussion?

None of my posts contain any statements that remotely resemble trolling. In civilized society, it's called sparking a discussion.

My "questions" that I chose "so carefully" were simple. Based on given information, which is 1st and which is 3rd world. Go from there...

Why do you keep asking the same question? As I mentioned in my original post, and also in a reply to you, yes, I'd be happy to hear other criteria. Feel free to introduce Transparency Internationals info/statistics into this discussion. It would be much more welcome than aggressive comments and unsubstantiated accusations.

If I'm trolling, I'm sure you have reported me, yes?

I think you drew conclusions and used carefully selected questions to guide readers to certain conclusions. Or perhaps you are really interested in questions about semantic and politically sensitive definitions about first, second, and third world dividing lines. If you are really into semantics, perhaps you should ask what's the difference between "big" and "really big".

If you are not trolling and truly interested in an easy way to determine the difference between a desirable and undesirable country, I think my original reply gives a good indication: Are borders guarded to keep people in or out?

[wintermute]

If you've truly been to India, then you would know that statement is false. India has some of the worst slums in the world...and are far worse than anything here. And yes, I've been in the Klong Toey slums. Slummin' it as they say. But it was daylight out!

India is honestly a cesspool outside of a few tourist areas. The high population density and lack of proper sewage treatment and hygiene leads to all sorts of bio hazards. There is also a long running tradition of dumping human corpses into the Ganges river which contaminates urban water sources which people drink all the time.

[jimbeam1]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn't put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

I agree to a degree. It is the old system but the terms are still in common usage. But are the new terms truly much more accurate?

So would the States be underveloped or developing because of their staggering debt (and crumbling infrastructure)? Is Thailand developed because of low unemployment and low per capita national debt along with strong industrial growth?

Maybe we need new factors defined and new terms?

How are you defining low unemployment in Thailand? Counting the few who qualify for benefits. Or the hundred's of thousand's that do not.

jb1

[mstribling]

Nice, draw your conclusions then design a survey that supports it. May I suggest adding a few other questions? GDP per person, literacy rate, live expectancy, vague things like freedom of speech and minimal corruption?

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

If you've truly been to India, then you would know that statement is false. India has some of the worst slums in the world...and are far worse than anything here. And yes, I've been in the Klong Toey slums. Slummin' it as they say. But it was daylight out!

I tried to visit the favelas in Brazil, but couldn't get there as no taxi driver would take us close enough to walk! I did visit the slums in India...beyond belief.

VERY true. I work in Uganda, and i'll often come across Indians who have migrated to Uganda to escape the squalor of India.Imagine going to Africa to escape your life!

I have often said that Thai's have nothing to complain about.

Odd though, I often read here, on TV how they think Thailand is a third-workd country.

I guess some people havent traveled much.

[happyrobert]

HeyBruce, I would think that every OP has drawn some sort of conclusion at the time of posting. Well, maybe not the one about wearing shorts, but most everything else.

But I did ask for opinions and I was truly interested in hearing them. That's the difference. I wasn't trying to manipulate anyone's thinking. Can't be done with the intelligent readers, anyway.

It wasn't about desirable nor undesirable, and I can see where I may have dropped the ball. The question is, what constitutes a 1st world country. My belief is it is the country's ability to survive and prosper in the long term, with minimal internal and external conflict. Economy plays a large part in that.

Although irrelevant to the post, borders are guarded for both reasons. N. Korea or the previous E. Germany are fine examples. America's borders, however, appear to be unguarded. But that's another post.

[jimbeam1]

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

Have you been to West Virginia, Arkansas, Tennesee?

They are not Countries.

Uhhh, yea, but they are in a country. One that lays claim to 1st world status.

I repeat they are not Countries

jb1

[wintermute]

That's how it looks to me. The squalor that people live in here is hidden but can be found easy enough if you want to find it. Most people from western countries seem to only see the not so filthy living standards of the poor people of this country. Just as bad as the Indian slums & shanty towns of the world.

Tunnel vision perhaps or just the refusal to see anything that dosent fit into thier cosy life

The squalor is not nearly as bad. You want to see bad? go to the Phillipines or Indonesia. You have poor families who have to resort to boiling discarded chicken bones they find from hunting through mountains of garbage.

[happyrobert]

I think the terms 1st or 3rd world country is obsolete these days as it was used to define so called non-aligned countries during the cold war. It just so happened these countries tended to be South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and were not very well developed at that time.

It is much more accurate to classify countries as developed, developing, or undeveloped based on their social-economic progress.

The OP was trying to show that many developed countries have lower economic growth rates and as much income disparity as many developing countries. He couldn't put the GDP per person in as that would make it obvious what he was trying to do.

TH

I agree to a degree. It is the old system but the terms are still in common usage. But are the new terms truly much more accurate?

So would the States be underveloped or developing because of their staggering debt (and crumbling infrastructure)? Is Thailand developed because of low unemployment and low per capita national debt along with strong industrial growth?

Maybe we need new factors defined and new terms?

How are you defining low unemployment in Thailand? Counting the few who qualify for benefits. Or the hundred's of thousand's that do not.

jb1

I took the stats off a government website, so I'm not defining it. But, I understand what you are asking and I do know that in the States once people have used up all their unemployment benefits, they are no longer "officially" unemployed and then no longer in the statistic. But they are still unemployed.

Then we have to ask about who is better equipped to survive "unemployment". I think Thai are as they have less debt, closer extended families, houses that are generally clear and free of debt, and the ability to find food to eat 30 seconds after stepping off the road into the trees and brush. I see one guy go into the woods and the sea everyday and he eats quite well, cooking over bamboo fires.

Americans have enormous personal debt that they must pay each month, and when they want food, it's cash.