Why are rich countries rich and poor countries poor?

[TheCoinGrabber]

I didn't know Algeria is an oil producing country. I rarely even hear it in the news. I wonder what could have caused the difference. Isn't Algeria not fully Arabicized? I believe there is a native ethnic group there, Berber if memory serves right...

Yes, I'll allow myself to quote: Algeria is the tenth-largest country in the world, and the largest in Africa (...) the 16th largest oil reserves in the world and the second largest in Africa, while it has the 9th largest reserves of natural gas
So, basically we have a huge and rich country, that has oil and gas, both of which are wanted by basically everyone and it's still poor. It's a third world out there with almost no big stores or galleries and 20% people living below the poverty level. You're of course right about the Berbers.

This is sad, many of us here in our country would wish to have that much oil so we don't need to import all of it. Why haven't they took advantage of their resource? Is it politically unstable there? Income from all those oil could have fueled an economic boom, they can export oil and use the natural gas for themselves. This is... baffling.

[Okurkabinladin]

No. Look at China, Indonesia, Phillipines. Look at resurgent Iran and Turkey and Brazil. Accumulation of wealth takes time and dedication, but its not impossible. Likewise, rich wont stay rich, if they take it for granted.

I live in the Philippines and yes it is a VERY slow crawl up. In the news you either see its drug war or the growing economy. Very little of that wealth actually trickles down and it'd take a few more decades for policy changes to show their effects. For example, the additional 2 years in high school that would be devoted to a technical specialization would not make its effects know until all those kids graduated.

Depends on their government. Some are rich because of capitalist policies or have good natural resources. Some are poor because of poor management of the economy by their governments.

If the government is not interested in the welfare of its own citizens, then nothing can be done. Look at the African nations such as Gabon and Equatorial Guinea. These countries are very poor, despite the huge petroleum deposits.  

I'm not very religious but we a have proverb here in my country, "to God, mercy; to man, action". Sitting on the largest lump of gold, diamond, or oil will not do anything if you don't work and manage it properly. Now the question is, how did some countries got to develop and benefit greatly from their resources (for example, KSA and its oil) while others didn't (example, Venezuela)?

Hi, I just want to let you know, that I absolutely, utterly love "moro armor" that blacksmiths in your country used to produce. Perfect convergence of aesthetics and practicality.

Now, on to the economics.

I belive, that your countrys turbulent history has alot to do with it. From what I could read up on it, unlike say Koreans or Japanese, various people of the islands were only united farly late during colonial period with major help from jezuits and european guns.

Now, what makes a country? Common language, culture (usually, but not always shaped by religion), shared history and values. Otherwise, you end up with privately run corporation with its people as slaves.

To amend differences between various, formerly independent tribes and make progressive changes, you need A LOT of time. Something only crazy people and religous freaks are capable of. Is Duterte man like that? Long term, I see no reason why your country wouldnt catch up with southern Europe or say Taiwan. IF it can resolve its internal friction.

Venezuela is specific in the fact, that it tried to take a shortcut. Forsake development of its civil society in favor of "leap forwards" as Chinese communists used to say. This never works out as state controlled development of every single aspect of citizens life undermines private enterprise and stumps their development. Once the regime falls, its people will have to start all over again. Like Russians or Ukrainians in 1990.

[darkangel11]

I didn't know Algeria is an oil producing country. I rarely even hear it in the news. I wonder what could have caused the difference. Isn't Algeria not fully Arabicized? I believe there is a native ethnic group there, Berber if memory serves right...

Yes, I'll allow myself to quote: Algeria is the tenth-largest country in the world, and the largest in Africa (...) the 16th largest oil reserves in the world and the second largest in Africa, while it has the 9th largest reserves of natural gas
So, basically we have a huge and rich country, that has oil and gas, both of which are wanted by basically everyone and it's still poor. It's a third world out there with almost no big stores or galleries and 20% people living below the poverty level. You're of course right about the Berbers.

This is sad, many of us here in our country would wish to have that much oil so we don't need to import all of it. Why haven't they took advantage of their resource? Is it politically unstable there? Income from all those oil could have fueled an economic boom, they can export oil and use the natural gas for themselves. This is... baffling.

You can read a lot about their history online. In short, the country was occupied by France until half of the last century, when they rebelled and decided they want their own government. Angry mobs started to murder non-Arab citizens and most of them eventually fled back to France. The new government wanted the country to be purely Islamic again and chose socialism as the political system. Now if you look at how current and former socialist countries are doing economically, it should be easy to explain why Algeria is in its current state. Also, the prices of oil were really low in the 70s and 80s, so the country had no money and no infrastructure, and they didn't allow foreigners to invest and build it.

[TheCoinGrabber]

I didn't know Algeria is an oil producing country. I rarely even hear it in the news. I wonder what could have caused the difference. Isn't Algeria not fully Arabicized? I believe there is a native ethnic group there, Berber if memory serves right...

Yes, I'll allow myself to quote: Algeria is the tenth-largest country in the world, and the largest in Africa (...) the 16th largest oil reserves in the world and the second largest in Africa, while it has the 9th largest reserves of natural gas
So, basically we have a huge and rich country, that has oil and gas, both of which are wanted by basically everyone and it's still poor. It's a third world out there with almost no big stores or galleries and 20% people living below the poverty level. You're of course right about the Berbers.

This is sad, many of us here in our country would wish to have that much oil so we don't need to import all of it. Why haven't they took advantage of their resource? Is it politically unstable there? Income from all those oil could have fueled an economic boom, they can export oil and use the natural gas for themselves. This is... baffling.

You can read a lot about their history online. In short, the country was occupied by France until half of the last century, when they rebelled and decided they want their own government. Angry mobs started to murder non-Arab citizens and most of them eventually fled back to France. The new government wanted the country to be purely Islamic again and chose socialism as the political system. Now if you look at how current and former socialist countries are doing economically, it should be easy to explain why Algeria is in its current state. Also, the prices of oil were really low in the 70s and 80s, so the country had no money and no infrastructure, and they didn't allow foreigners to invest and build it.

Yikes. Looks like they really needed all that money to jump start their industries but they chose to reject it. I mean, that's a bit stupid - how can you implement socialism if you don't have the money to run it first? It seem it really only look good on paper and would be hard to establish unless you are already rich enough to start doling out subsidies

[TheCoinGrabber]

No. Look at China, Indonesia, Phillipines. Look at resurgent Iran and Turkey and Brazil. Accumulation of wealth takes time and dedication, but its not impossible. Likewise, rich wont stay rich, if they take it for granted.

I live in the Philippines and yes it is a VERY slow crawl up. In the news you either see its drug war or the growing economy. Very little of that wealth actually trickles down and it'd take a few more decades for policy changes to show their effects. For example, the additional 2 years in high school that would be devoted to a technical specialization would not make its effects know until all those kids graduated.

Depends on their government. Some are rich because of capitalist policies or have good natural resources. Some are poor because of poor management of the economy by their governments.

If the government is not interested in the welfare of its own citizens, then nothing can be done. Look at the African nations such as Gabon and Equatorial Guinea. These countries are very poor, despite the huge petroleum deposits.  

I'm not very religious but we a have proverb here in my country, "to God, mercy; to man, action". Sitting on the largest lump of gold, diamond, or oil will not do anything if you don't work and manage it properly. Now the question is, how did some countries got to develop and benefit greatly from their resources (for example, KSA and its oil) while others didn't (example, Venezuela)?

Hi, I just want to let you know, that I absolutely, utterly love "moro armor" that blacksmiths in your country used to produce. Perfect convergence of aesthetics and practicality.

Now, on to the economics.

I belive, that your countrys turbulent history has alot to do with it. From what I could read up on it, unlike say Koreans or Japanese, various people of the islands were only united farly late during colonial period with major help from jezuits and european guns.

Now, what makes a country? Common language, culture (usually, but not always shaped by religion), shared history and values. Otherwise, you end up with privately run corporation with its people as slaves.

To amend differences between various, formerly independent tribes and make progressive changes, you need A LOT of time. Something only crazy people and religous freaks are capable of. Is Duterte man like that? Long term, I see no reason why your country wouldnt catch up with southern Europe or say Taiwan. IF it can resolve its internal friction.

Venezuela is specific in the fact, that it tried to take a shortcut. Forsake development of its civil society in favor of "leap forwards" as Chinese communists used to say. This never works out as state controlled development of every single aspect of citizens life undermines private enterprise and stumps their development. Once the regime falls, its people will have to start all over again. Like Russians or Ukrainians in 1990.

I haven't even heard of "moro armor". Is it something only the Muslims down south make?

I agree with the unification problem. The mountainous terrain and archipelagic set up basically ensured we'd be disunited. It seem non of the invaders managed to really develop a national culture. The Spanish took advantage of the ethnic divide. The Americans didn't but they also did not do enough to integrate everyone. The past round of election even made clear with now president Duterte making racist remarks  at Tagalogs during campaign. (He has since stopped mentioning it coz he basically live in Tagalog-land now.)

This is what critics of a federal setup fear - it could eventually lead to each state declaring independence (especially if they were cut along ethnic lines). That's something China and Malaysia would be glad to see.

[Sithara007]

I'm not very religious but we a have proverb here in my country, "to God, mercy; to man, action". Sitting on the largest lump of gold, diamond, or oil will not do anything if you don't work and manage it properly. Now the question is, how did some countries got to develop and benefit greatly from their resources (for example, KSA and its oil) while others didn't (example, Venezuela)?

There are a lot of examples for countries which became rich thanks to their natural resources. But definitely Saudi Arabia is not one of them. There is a lot of wealth in that country, but the distribution of wealth is very uneven. There are a lot of poor people in Saudi Arabia.

[Okurkabinladin]

I'm not very religious but we a have proverb here in my country, "to God, mercy; to man, action". Sitting on the largest lump of gold, diamond, or oil will not do anything if you don't work and manage it properly. Now the question is, how did some countries got to develop and benefit greatly from their resources (for example, KSA and its oil) while others didn't (example, Venezuela)?

There are a lot of examples for countries which became rich thanks to their natural resources. But definitely Saudi Arabia is not one of them. There is a lot of wealth in that country, but the distribution of wealth is very uneven. There are a lot of poor people in Saudi Arabia.

Precisely. Gulf States usually have relatively small aristocratic class on top, who have jobs in public sector created for them. Real work is done by foreign specialists and slave labourers from Asia and Africa. When you realize that all those vast natural resources are all used up by couple of hundred of thousands individuals it makes sense.

[Mometaskers]

So I was just surfing the web during my downtime and the internet being a rabbit hole that it is, I realized I got to this page....  http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20010817233944data_trunc_sys.shtml

Having read Guns, Germs and Steel before (as well as watching the documentary on Youtube), I was really surprised that the difference can be attributed to simple things like frost.

This got me thinking, if you believe the poor countries are already locked in to their fate by the cards dealt them, does this mean they are blameless for their current situation? Did colonialism really messed them up or it simply exacerbated an existing problem? And how can poor countries overcome the challenges to becoming 1st-World?

Thats popular in secular liberal circles in the west. To teach youngsters what collective guilt is and to instill fear upon them. People are more obedient that way.

Even though some western european countries managed (due to many factors) to extert control over many continents for several generations - there were already vast differences between cultures around the world. Some places like Africa and Australia being firmly stuck in animism and stone age. Other, like Europe and middle East lagged behind east Asia for most of their history (and arguably again today).

I have to agree with you - if you are only concerned about material possesions, than indeed environment is paramount. Since the world is so incredibly globalized today, IQ of population is not as important as the prevailing culture (which includes work ethics).

Koreans easily outperform any african nation, regardless of the fact, that after civil war they had lower living standarts and relatively poor soil.

Many point out East Asian excellence to Confucian ethics. Also, let's not forget China was the first civ to implement the civil service exam. The culture of meritocracy was all ready present there.

There is a proverb: why the poor, because the bad, and why the bad, because the poor, this is the case for the countries of Asia.

Sigh, the classic chicken-or-egg I guess? Problem is, in most cases, there's little people there can do and those in power would not have enough clout or will encounter great resistance, if they do anything drastic to try to change the status quo. That is, if they're even planning on changing it. You'd be surprised at how much lip-service these people give to change while doing nothing and only enacting reforms that would benefit them and their cronies.

[Sithara007]

Precisely. Gulf States usually have relatively small aristocratic class on top, who have jobs in public sector created for them. Real work is done by foreign specialists and slave labourers from Asia and Africa. When you realize that all those vast natural resources are all used up by couple of hundred of thousands individuals it makes sense.

I don't understand why these Asians and Africans prefer to work in Saudi Arabia. Almost all the women are sexually abused and tortured, and even the men are forced to give homosexual favors to their employers. Check these:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/21/world/meast/saudi-filipino-maid/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-filipino-philippines-maid-raped-by-employer-dies-in-hospital-a7207041.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/woman-allegedly-tortured-to-death-by-her-employer-in-saudi-arabia-a7020551.html
http://time.com/4067663/saudi-woman-india-hand-chopped-employer-sushma-swaraj/
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-arabia/saudi-businesswoman-faces-charges-of-torturing-maid-to-death-1.1571909

[Aleister Crowley]

I'm not very religious but we a have proverb here in my country, "to God, mercy; to man, action". Sitting on the largest lump of gold, diamond, or oil will not do anything if you don't work and manage it properly. Now the question is, how did some countries got to develop and benefit greatly from their resources (for example, KSA and its oil) while others didn't (example, Venezuela)?

There are a lot of examples for countries which became rich thanks to their natural resources. But definitely Saudi Arabia is not one of them. There is a lot of wealth in that country, but the distribution of wealth is very uneven. There are a lot of poor people in Saudi Arabia.

Many factors about this question, this country can become rich because of its small population, so the government can divide it in all regions equally, but rich countries can be poor if the population and its territory is large, perhaps. It is rather difficult to manage state money and should be given to all the large areas. And a country with a lot of natural resources may not necessarily be a rich country if its government can not manage its natural wealth well. I think that's some reason and the answer, .. Saudi Arabia became a developed country due to oil, and they could manage their natural wealth well, ..

[Okurkabinladin]

Precisely. Gulf States usually have relatively small aristocratic class on top, who have jobs in public sector created for them. Real work is done by foreign specialists and slave labourers from Asia and Africa. When you realize that all those vast natural resources are all used up by couple of hundred of thousands individuals it makes sense.

I don't understand why these Asians and Africans prefer to work in Saudi Arabia. Almost all the women are sexually abused and tortured, and even the men are forced to give homosexual favors to their employers. Check these:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/21/world/meast/saudi-filipino-maid/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-filipino-philippines-maid-raped-by-employer-dies-in-hospital-a7207041.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/woman-allegedly-tortured-to-death-by-her-employer-in-saudi-arabia-a7020551.html
http://time.com/4067663/saudi-woman-india-hand-chopped-employer-sushma-swaraj/
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-arabia/saudi-businesswoman-faces-charges-of-torturing-maid-to-death-1.1571909

Its all about perspective, friend. When you are growing up in slums, what would you rather do? Prostitute yourself to make it as another throw away refugee into european camp. Or try arab recruitment agency? Of course they dont tell you about the conditions. If nothing else, Arabs are good at persuasion.

They show the poor kid this:



Not this:

[Mometaskers]

Precisely. Gulf States usually have relatively small aristocratic class on top, who have jobs in public sector created for them. Real work is done by foreign specialists and slave labourers from Asia and Africa. When you realize that all those vast natural resources are all used up by couple of hundred of thousands individuals it makes sense.

I don't understand why these Asians and Africans prefer to work in Saudi Arabia. Almost all the women are sexually abused and tortured, and even the men are forced to give homosexual favors to their employers. Check these:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/21/world/meast/saudi-filipino-maid/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-filipino-philippines-maid-raped-by-employer-dies-in-hospital-a7207041.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/woman-allegedly-tortured-to-death-by-her-employer-in-saudi-arabia-a7020551.html
http://time.com/4067663/saudi-woman-india-hand-chopped-employer-sushma-swaraj/
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-arabia/saudi-businesswoman-faces-charges-of-torturing-maid-to-death-1.1571909

Poverty. Our country is one of the main exporters of workers there. Many of these people are given good offers here and then get the shock of their lives when they get there. Some would get a much smaller salary or find themselves in a different job. Some of those who managed to escape even say they were not given salary and barely eat and sleep. And of course some got abused.

A cousin got it easy... His salary was a few thousand peso lower than in the contract and he was assigned to a kitchen instead but the food and lodging was free and he was not mistreated. He did sorta "convert," even going to Mecca so that could partly explain the treatment. He also made use of the myth there that we are cannibals, lol  

[Lancusters]

Until the world is ruled by a few super powers we are doomed to be poor. The economy works so all poor countries serve the wealthy. The desire to escape from this poverty leads to the fact that many Africans become slaves in General.

[BADecker]

Until the world is ruled by a few super powers we are doomed to be poor. The economy works so all poor countries serve the wealthy. The desire to escape from this poverty leads to the fact that many Africans become slaves in General.

When the world is ruled by a few super powers we are doomed to be poor. Why? Because they sill suck the wealth out of us all.

[Lancusters]

Until the world is ruled by a few super powers we are doomed to be poor. The economy works so all poor countries serve the wealthy. The desire to escape from this poverty leads to the fact that many Africans become slaves in General.

When the world is ruled by a few super powers we are doomed to be poor. Why? Because they sill suck the wealth out of us all.

Not only suck the wealth. Due to the fact that they objectively are better they poach the best scientists, engineers, even athletes. The whole world grows teaches talented people, and they entice to themselves and those working for them great

[Sithara007]

A cousin got it easy... His salary was a few thousand peso lower than in the contract and he was assigned to a kitchen instead but the food and lodging was free and he was not mistreated. He did sorta "convert," even going to Mecca so that could partly explain the treatment. He also made use of the myth there that we are cannibals, lol  

Oh.. trust me. Your cousin was lucky. I know someone who landed for the first time in Saudi Arabia almost 20 years back. His sponsor was not there at the airport, and after a few hours, he was picked up by an unfamiliar Arab man. He took him to a goat farm in the middle of the desert, where he lived as a slave for 3-4 years. He was not allowed to contact the outside world, and he was not given any salary. Luckily, he managed to escape and return to his native place, unlike the dozens who vanished without a trace.

[gabmen]

A cousin got it easy... His salary was a few thousand peso lower than in the contract and he was assigned to a kitchen instead but the food and lodging was free and he was not mistreated. He did sorta "convert," even going to Mecca so that could partly explain the treatment. He also made use of the myth there that we are cannibals, lol  

Oh.. trust me. Your cousin was lucky. I know someone who landed for the first time in Saudi Arabia almost 20 years back. His sponsor was not there at the airport, and after a few hours, he was picked up by an unfamiliar Arab man. He took him to a goat farm in the middle of the desert, where he lived as a slave for 3-4 years. He was not allowed to contact the outside world, and he was not given any salary. Luckily, he managed to escape and return to his native place, unlike the dozens who vanished without a trace.

sad to hear stories like this at this time. goes to show that some people are not that fortunate when it comes to seeing their dreams for their families fulfilled in another country. I mean at this age, we would think that taking people as slaves would already be a crime

[bryant.coleman]

sad to hear stories like this at this time. goes to show that some people are not that fortunate when it comes to seeing their dreams for their families fulfilled in another country. I mean at this age, we would think that taking people as slaves would already be a crime

Modern day slavery is very prevalent and it remains hidden from the eyes of the media. You would be surprised to learn that even in some of the European Union nations (such as Italy), immigrants are being held against their will and exploited. And the saddest part is that the vast majority of these slaves (both male and female) are below the legal age of adulthood.

[Okurkabinladin]

sad to hear stories like this at this time. goes to show that some people are not that fortunate when it comes to seeing their dreams for their families fulfilled in another country. I mean at this age, we would think that taking people as slaves would already be a crime

Modern day slavery is very prevalent and it remains hidden from the eyes of the media. You would be surprised to learn that even in some of the European Union nations (such as Italy), immigrants are being held against their will and exploited. And the saddest part is that the vast majority of these slaves (both male and female) are below the legal age of adulthood.

To be perfectly frank, the more and more we learn about this "migrant crisis", the more it seems like modern slave trade. With both migrants and tax payers being its unwilling and perhaps naive sponsors. Corporate aligned NGOs promise these third world dwellers life of aristocracy and warm welcome (thats not real even for middle class Europeans) and when they sell all their belongings to smugglers, those same NGOs take money from tax payers to "take care of" the problem theyve created in the first place.

I was horrified the moment Ive learned, that these "activists" are sometimes directly financed by George Soros and even willing to clash with border guards. One recent incident involving these human rights people involved battling Lybians (!) patrol over custody of migrants.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/05/12/pro-migrant-ngo-clashes-libyan-coast-guard-migrants/

The more times change, the more they stay the same.

[mainpmf]

Rich countries are rich because they trust in god and balance their budgets.

Poor countries are poor because they trust their native or natural instincts of reward/fear thus they reject god, thus they lose god, thus they fall from grace.

God is free will. You can print as much money as you like only if you turn the other cheek when your opponents throw stones. Likewise you can be as vengeful as you please only if you remain sin-free. Justice is woven into gods design.

So why the richest countries are the most atheist countries? :/