Economic convergence

[Roseline492]

Economic convergence is a theory that poorer countries have the ability to grow faster than richer ones. A factor why is migration of labor from rich countries to poorer ones. Another is technology transfer. While rich countries innovate and develop, the poor countries copy and adapt enabling them to catch up without needing to make the innovations themselves.

But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real.

Theories doesn't mean it will take place regarding how it was said because some theories are like Proverbs that mean similar things relating to the point they made on the the theories but when people see it from the common sense they thought that the theory is not true. I will tell you what I understand from it, this theory is actually saying that poor countries that think they have no strength of becoming as the reputed countries could grow beyond those negative thoughts even if they did not become the most important. So the theory is saying the right thing but the different interpretation contradicts it.

[EarnOnVictor]

-snip-
But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real. Maybe it is for some countries but for mine it is definitely not. If economic convergence is real or applicable to a lot of countries, why poor countries remain poor or fail to actually exceed past the rich countries? What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

Bro, I was just questioning this post while reading it before I saw your concluding part and the questions asked afterwards. All I can say is that though Economics itself is right (if adhered to and followed carefully), human nature will always be a restriction. The reverse is what's happening in the world we are in right now, except a few countries like China, Korean, Russia etc that used, and still using  that to their advantage.

A lot of factors could be attributed to this as well, which is not limited to bad leadership, corruption in the poor countries, lack of foresight and creativity, unwillingness of the developed countries to help so that they can keep those poor countries poor, which could be for some certain reasons, which could be political or economical.

Except the poor countries wake up, the rich/advanced countries will always lead and continue to develop in a pace incomparable to the poor countries.

[hyudien]

Economic convergence is a theory that poorer countries have the ability to grow faster than richer ones. A factor why is migration of labor from rich countries to poorer ones. Another is technology transfer. While rich countries innovate and develop, the poor countries copy and adapt enabling them to catch up without needing to make the innovations themselves.

But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real. Maybe it is for some countries but for mine it is definitely not. If economic convergence is real or applicable to a lot of countries, why poor countries remain poor or fail to actually exceed past the rich countries? What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

It is said to be wrong, not really, because I quite believe that labor migration from rich countries to poor countries can shape the poor country towards a better direction in terms of progress in technology, infrastructure and agriculture but in terms of economic progress of its citizens I think although it can be said to change but it will not be big. The reality is too complicated, but if behind the people from poor countries migrate/work in rich countries, the situation may change slightly in the sense that the poverty rate in the country slowly decreases. This is the core factor why a country can be said to be developed/rich is because the poverty rate in the country is low.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real. Maybe it is for some countries but for mine it is definitely not. If economic convergence is real or applicable to a lot of countries, why poor countries remain poor or fail to actually exceed past the rich countries? What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

The countries remain poor because their leaders refused to break them out of the hold of their colonial masters or lenders for those who borrow money. No matter how much they copy though, they copy just the end results and not the technical buildups. They copy the richer countries but cannot see surpass them because they're dependent on these richer countries for actualizing those upgrades and trust me, the already developed countries would introduce policies that ensure those developing countries don't surpass them in the nearest future.

[Rhow]

Economic convergence is a theory that poorer countries have the ability to grow faster than richer ones. A factor why is migration of labor from rich countries to poorer ones. Another is technology transfer. While rich countries innovate and develop, the poor countries copy and adapt enabling them to catch up without needing to make the innovations themselves.

But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real. Maybe it is for some countries but for mine it is definitely not. If economic convergence is real or applicable to a lot of countries, why poor countries remain poor or fail to actually exceed past the rich countries? What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

In my opinion, the reason why a country becomes poor is its governance system, corruption, political instability, poor education, and poor health system. For all these reasons, poor countries cannot properly utilize the technology and investment of rich countries. Even though poor countries have labor force, they do not get proper evaluation. Again, rich countries export their technologies to poor countries and they have to send skilled manpower to maintain those technologies. Through this process, a rich country continues to rule over poor countries. Therefore, even if poor countries want to get rid of that rule, they have to improve their internal policies and environment.

[retreat]

What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

This theory is true, but only if the country is run by the best leaders with effective governance and minimal corruption. If the country continues to struggle with corruption and incompetent leaders, then the country will continue to suffer. A real-life example of this theory is Singapore. Who would have imagined that a region that was once swampy, lacking abundant natural resources, and even considered a small region with no significant potential, has now transformed into one of the world's most advanced countries with a high economic level. This is all thanks to their founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, who, with his iron hand, was able to transform Singapore into a modern nation.

[Marvelockg]

Economic convergence is a theory that poorer countries have the ability to grow faster than richer ones. A factor why is migration of labor from rich countries to poorer ones. Another is technology transfer. While rich countries innovate and develop, the poor countries copy and adapt enabling them to catch up without needing to make the innovations themselves.

Theoretically, it's easier for poorer countries to learn from developed ones and in the process improve on her countries economy but in reality, there's a lot of constraints that makes it hard for the implementation of such policies. Developing countries can only learn as much as the developed ones allows them to learn and most of those first world countries would expose the secret of Thier success to just any country.

Even after you've learnt it, another big issue is with regards effective implementation and another issue to be sure what works for country A will also work for country B. The systems around most developed countries that makes things work well for them is not same with what's the case with the developing ones.

 

[Oluwa-btc]

Economic convergence is a bit tricky because it needs deliberate efforts, consistency and disciplined policies to achieve that.The rich countries started earlier and are ahead but the poorer ones are behind but can run faster by learning from those ahead.
South Korea and Singapore,achieved rapid convergence through industrialization and technology adoption.They didn’t isolate themselves they learned from the ones ahead of them,adopted best practices,and disciplined themselves to follow through the examples.

[DYOR+BTC]

Economic convergence is a bit tricky because it needs deliberate efforts, consistency and disciplined policies to achieve that.The rich countries started earlier and are ahead but the poorer ones are behind but can run faster by learning from those ahead.
South Korea and Singapore,achieved rapid convergence through industrialization and technology adoption.They didn’t isolate themselves they learned from the ones ahead of them,adopted best practices,and disciplined themselves to follow through the examples.

Yes I agree to that, countries with weak economy willing to the adapt to that of the developed countries easily gets to where they desire to be  while those that are blindfolded by corruption and selfish leaders still go below average once. Laying emphasis on that of African countries at large, they had what it takes to meet up to the desired dreams of the poor but find it difficult getting to that all because of corrupt political representatives who focus much on converting  public resources to private and never  think of looking up to the developed countries economic systems which had space for the weak, poor and the entire masses, so making theoretical expectations come to reality becomes very difficult.

[Keevoid]

But after reading this, I wondered if this theory is real. Maybe it is for some countries but for mine it is definitely not. If economic convergence is real or applicable to a lot of countries, why poor countries remain poor or fail to actually exceed past the rich countries? What do you think? Is this theory real or no?

The idea of economic convergence makes sense in theory, but when I look at my own country, it doesn’t really play out that way. The potential is there, with access to global knowledge, technology, and talent, yet poor governance, corruption, and weak infrastructure keep holding things back. Some countries manage to grow quickly by strengthening their systems and investing in education, while others struggle to maintain progress. So the theory isn’t entirely false, but it doesn’t apply evenly. It really depends on how well a country manages its resources and institutions.