Troubadour
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 464
- Reaction score
- 181
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Define "advance".
The term "developing country" can mean anything from a third-world economy with high ambitions to a country that is on the verge of becoming first world, but isn't traditionally thought as such in the United States. Economies can be treacherous, but a solid political foundation can allow a country to grow and develop on a regular footing, weathering storms and making the most of opportunities. Which developing country do you feel has the best political foundation for its people to advance?
Okay, so this is just rhetorical masturbation. Have fun.
I really don't think that Singapore should be on that list.
India
Democratic, but also chaotic and unwieldy.
That's merely a healthy sign of democracy.
Look at ours.
First off Singapore is a developed country and is richer than the US, and should not be on the list.
Chile[/B] - Good country with a stable government and sound policies. Is the richest country in South America.
Turkey - Also one of the better ones especially compared to other muslim countries, but I don't believe they have any potential. Just a poorer and more extreme version of Greece.
Argentina - Never, they were a first world country and now is a third world country. How embarrasing! They are undermining their own potential by having huge restrictions on the market and they had huge troubles with their debts.
They have kept crime down, they have good growth rates and is the richest country in South America, just joined OECD, but their income inequality is too high.
But income inequality is too high in every single country in South America. Also Venezuela. Funny thing is, socialist Venezuala is filled with slums, while Chile has a lot less than other countries in South America.
Correct, the story is much more complicated than that. It all started with a right wing military government taking over Argentinas economy. They actually did cause growth, reduced their chronic trade deficit and reduced poverty, but it also increased civil unrest and in 1973 they had elections again. Then the socialist Juan Perón took back the power. Juan Perón wasn't too bad the last time, and he had some good policies, for instance building a lot og schools and hospitals. However, this time he was much worse. He started using wage hikes and price controls, and we know from experience that price controls do cause a lot of problems. The economy went from trade surpluses to trade deficits and the economy soon crashed, with huge currency devauations.I doubt they've become a third world country again simply due to debt. There is such a thing as social inertia.
Eh, I'm surprised South Africa isn't on that list.
Of the developing nations, I'm sure South Africa is slated to be a player on the world stage, a great power, if you will, before the century is out.
Yeah right! Some problems with your theory.
1. South Africa is a medium sized country with a population of 50 million people. If France (which is developed country) can't be a world power, then South Africa certainly can't.
2. South Africa has a GDP per capita of 9000-10000 USD dollars. And a low economic growth rate compared to other developing countries. It's nominal GDP (not per capita) is behind Denmark.
3. South Africa is a declining society. It suffers from a huge brain drain, because they are not tackling crime. When their brightest citizens leave, then the country will decline. Also, AIDS is another problem that will be hard to solve. It's infrastructure is falling apart and it's pretty much living off old wealth. In 1973 Taiwan and South Africa had the same GDP per capita. Today Taiwan's GDP per capita is 3 times as high.
South Africa won't be a world power anytime soon. The new world powers are India and China.
Right now there is only one world power. No other country are strong enough to have a heavy influence on the rest of the world. Yes, France nominal total GDP is on 5th place, but it's still only 4.6% of the world GDP. On nearly the same level you find Italy who has 3.7% of worlds GDP. Is Italy a world power? Can Italy act on their own like the US did with the Iraq war.Firstly, France is a world power -- it's one of the great five, and according to Bismarckian theory (as well as all modern estimates), France is one of the top three most powerful nations on Earth. So I'm not sure how well that example holds up.
Secondly, I believe the question was, which nation's political system seems to hold potential, or something to that effect. I didn't say I predicted the rise of South Africa as the next British Empire, or anything like that. Just that its political system has proven surprisingly... Well, surprising. South Africa is the only nation to have had nuclear weapons, and disarm all of them. South Africa was the pioneer of successful black leadership. It's just an interesting place, and i'd like to see how it turns out in coming years.
Right now there is only one world power. No other country are strong...
The term "developing country" can mean anything from a third-world economy with high ambitions to a country that is on the verge of becoming first world, but isn't traditionally thought as such in the United States. Economies can be treacherous, but a solid political foundation can allow a country to grow and develop on a regular footing, weathering storms and making the most of opportunities. Which developing country do you feel has the best political foundation for its people to advance?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?