Third world countries

[The Last Conformist]

Half the economy is agriculture, mostly effectively subsistence.

 

[carniflex]

Half the economy is agriculture, mostly effectively subsistence.

True.
And due to the fact that a too big part of the other half is "selling" raw materials, instead of improving the agricultural half.

 

[Hakim]

I thought 2nd World countries as equal or close to equal in development as 1st world countries. It's just that they're not on our side. I wonder if the Russians considered themselves to be 1st world, and the US to be 2nd world.

I've always thought that those expressions were a mostly economic division of the world - now I know better.

 

[philippe]

we all still live in the zeroth world

 

[luiz]

Cuba is NOT a third-world country, it is the richest country in er... central America (besides Mexico I think).

Cuba is poorer then Costa Rica, Porto Rico, Panama, Mexico. And those are only the ones I'm sure about, certainly there are many others.

PS: Before Castro, Cuba was the richest Latin-American nation.

 

[luiz]

According to the first and still famous definition, Third World Countries are all poor nations, communist or capitalist(or half way there).

According to a new definition, proposed by a famous french sociologist whose name I can't remember, this would be the new division:

First World Countries - Producers of Technology and patents
Second World Countries - Manufacturers
Third World Countries - Non-industrialised nations

The thing is today one can't just lump coutries such as Brazil, China or Chile in the same group as Somalia, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe.

 

[sebanaj]

Well, it's more gradual, some third world countries have industries, but differs from region to region. The main problem of their development is the intervention of the State, regulation, taxation, and no freedom of markets. Regulation and taxation are the causes of corruption.
Taxes are way too high.

 

[carniflex]

Cuba is poorer then Costa Rica, Porto Rico, Panama, Mexico. And those are only the ones I'm sure about, certainly there are many others.

infantile mortality rate:

Cuba 0.9%
Porto Rico 1.3%
Jamaïque 1.3%
Costa Rica 1.4%
Bahamas 2.4%
Panama 2.8%
Belize 3.4%
Mexico 3.4%
Salvador 4.1%
Dom. Rep 4.2%
Guatemala 4.8%
Nicaragua 4.9%
Honduras 5.0%
Haïti 7.4%

Cuba is poorer...
and the cubans live better.

 

[Sweeney Todd]

Third world countries are in a world of their own...

...and does it not surprise you that there are no caucasian race dominant countries in this bracket?

Woo! Imperialism and racial superiority!

 

[luiz]

infantile mortality rate:

Cuba 0.9%
Porto Rico 1.3%
Jamaïque 1.3%
Costa Rica 1.4%
Bahamas 2.4%
Panama 2.8%
Belize 3.4%
Mexico 3.4%
Salvador 4.1%
Dom. Rep 4.2%
Guatemala 4.8%
Nicaragua 4.9%
Honduras 5.0%
Haïti 7.4%

Cuba is poorer...
and the cubans live better.

By choosing a specific statistic I could "prove" that brazilians live better the swiss. What you got to do is take a comprehensive basketcase of statistics, and only then you can have a relatively accurate picture.

If you take the UN´s Human Development Index, for exemple, here´s what you have:

Barbados 0.871
Argentina 0.844
Chile 0.831
Uruguay 0.831
Costa Rica 0.820
Trinidad and Tobago 0.805
Antigua and Barbuda 0.800
Mexico 0.796
Cuba 0.795

link

As you can see, Cubans don´t live better now. But they did before Castro ruined the nation.

 

[romelus]

I never said corruption was a form of government simply stated all 3rd World countries are corrupt. Which might I add is a fact.

that's false. the country of Pitcairn is corruption free, it doesn't have an administration or any government body, sucker

 

[carniflex]

1. Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are not central America countries. We were speaking of central America countries. You cheated.

2. I listed all central America countries. You did not. You cheated.

3. IDH is no accurate picture of how people live because it includes GNP. GNP learns absolutely NOTHING on how people live.

GNP learns how much wealth a country produces. It says NOTHING about the use of this wealth.

4. Infantile mortality rate is a VERY ACCURATE picture of how peope live.
Cubans do live better now.

By choosing a specific statistic I could "prove" that brazilians live better the swiss.

I think I could not. But YOU surely could.

Castro ruined the nation

You should have added : "in spite of the US-embargo"

 

[amadeus]

Cuba is NOT a third-world country, it is the richest country in er... central America (besides Mexico I think).

False. Cuba's (exaggerated) per capita GDP numbers only exceed Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

Costa Rican and Mexican per capita GDP is over three times that of Cuba. Panama is about twice, and El Salvador about one and a half.

Life expectancy is (supposedly) greater in Cuba, however, Costa Rica falls short only by a few months, Mexico a couple of years, and the rest from about five to ten years.

Literacy in Cuba is (again, supposedly, as well, it is difficult to define what "literacy" is.) 97%. Costa Rica again falls short only by one percent, Mexico and Panama by about five percent, and El Salvador by about fifteen percent. Honduras and Nicaragua fall much further behind, by about twenty to thirty percent.

There's always the point too that what good is literacy if everything to read is banned? Try finding 1984 at Havana's state book stores.

 

[amadeus]

You should have added : "in spite of the US-embargo"

Rhodesia and South Africa had much larger embargoes than just the United States and their economies still grew.

 

[luiz]

1. Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are not central America countries. We were speaking of central America countries. You cheated.

I was making the point that before Castro they were the richest Latin American country, and now they're far from it.

2. I listed all central America countries. You did not. You cheated.

Again, what matters is not they are better-off then some countries. What matters is that used to be number one, now they are far from it.

3. IDH is no accurate picture of how people live because it includes GNP. GNP learns absolutely NOTHING on how people live.

GNP per capita tells alot of how people live. Why wounld't it, specially of balanced to purchasing power parity?

GNP learns how much wealth a country produces. It says NOTHING about the use of this wealth.

It says aboyt the wealth in the hands of the people, how they use is their business. If you meant that it does not reflect concentration of wealth, then you're right, but the HDI fixes this problem.

4. Infantile mortality rate is a VERY ACCURATE picture of how peope live.
Cubans do live better now.

No it's not, and no they do not.
Low Infantile mortality means that the medical assistence to pregnant women is OK. Nothing beyond that. What does it say about the comfort of the lifes of the average cuban?

I think I could not. But YOU surely could.

Do you think ALL swiss social/economic indicators are superior to ALL brazilian social/economic indicators? Or are you just incaple of admotting that one single statistic proves nothing?

You should have added : "in spite of the US-embargo"

The US embargo prevents Cuba from trading with the US.

Since accordong to Castro trading with the US means exploitation, they should be happy about the embargo, now shouldn't they?

They are free to trade with the rest of the world.

 

[carniflex]

GNP per capita tells alot of how people live.

No, "it does not reflect concentration of wealth", as you said it

Low Infantile mortality means that the medical assistence to pregnant women is OK. Nothing beyond that. What does it say about the comfort of the lifes of the average cuban?

The average cuban is a woman who already gave birth to a living child. Not so usual on earth.

Do you think ALL swiss social/economic indicators are superior to ALL brazilian social/economic indicators? Or are you just incaple of admotting that one single statistic proves nothing?

I think that ALL swiss, or cuban, social indicators are superior to ALL brazilian social indicators. I dont care about economic indicators.

The US embargo prevents Cuba from trading with the US.
Since accordong to Castro trading with the US means exploitation, they should be happy about the embargo, now shouldn't they?

I am no Castrist like you. I dont think trade means exploitation. Only capitalism allways means exploitation.

They are free to trade with the rest of the world.

The entire world is free to trade with Cuba, to displease to the US, and to be bombed.

 

[luiz]

No, "it does not reflect concentration of wealth", as you said it

But the HDI uses the Gini Index to balance that.

The average cuban is a woman who already gave birth to a living child. Not so usual on earth.

I think that ALL swiss, or cuban, social indicators are superior to ALL brazilian social indicators. I dont care about economic indicators.

Why don't you care for economic indicators? The Economy means stuff, you know.

It's really a joke to say that Cuba beats Brazil in all social indicators, specially when you consider that many social indicators are also eocnomic ones.
For exemple, why don't you compare the per capita consumption of electricity in Brazil and Cuba? You might get a surprise there. Per Capita consumption of electricity is considered a good way of measuring the development of a nation.

I am no Castrist like you. I dont think trade means exploitation. Only capitalism allways means exploitation.

Capitalism is based on trade.

The entire world is free to trade with Cuba, to displease to the US, and to be bombed.

Oh really?
When was the last time the US bombed Spain? Or China? Or Brazil?
BECAUSE THOSE COUNTRIES DO TRADE WITH CUBA

People like to talk alot about the embargo, without even knowing what it means.

 

[amadeus]

I dont care about economic indicators.

That says it all. Let's all be [expletive] poor.

 

[carniflex]

But the HDI uses the Gini Index to balance that.

GNP per capita, balanced or not, means nothing social.

Why don't you care for economic indicators?

because they donot determine if the people are poor, wich is the subjet of this debate. Policy do.

It's really a joke to say that Cuba beats Brazil in all social indicators

For most of brazilians, it is not a joke.

For exemple, why don't you compare the per capita consumption of electricity in Brazil and Cuba?

Because any per capita consumption, as GNP per capita, "does not reflect concentration of wealth", as you (and i) said it

Capitalism is based on trade.

Capitalism is based on exploitation. Trade existed before Capitalism. They are different things.

When was the last time the US bombed Spain? Or China? Or Brazil?

Dont be so impatient. They're on the list.
Oh, you forgot that Bolivarian Venezuela you love.

 

[Free Enterprise]

"Third World" doesn't indicate a rank, it indicates a portion. The world was divided in three... one third was represented with the Western block, one third with the Eastern, and last third was... well, the "third world".

Anyway, today we like better to talk about "developping countries" and "least developped countries". (Not sure of English expresions though)

That indeed is exactly what happened. The only problem is that sometimes people try to use first, second and third world as economic indicators after the end of the Cold War since the terms became mostly obsolete. This sometimes has obscured the origins.