Will the under developed nations come out of its under development?

[Emitdama]

Under development countries will mainly focus on building a strong infrastructure, providing better jobs and supporting their citizens initially. Competing with developed nations will not even be a thought until they develop their nation first. I can see a lot of under development countries are now making their way towards being developed. There always will be a few remaining states where the development will reach quite late but major states will show promising development.

Under developed countries will definitely make their way towards a fully developed nation but it will surely take some time. These countries will initially focus on a fewer states where development is easy due to the availability of resources.

[mvdheuvel1983]

Under development countries will mainly focus on building a strong infrastructure, providing better jobs and supporting their citizens initially. Competing with developed nations will not even be a thought until they develop their nation first. I can see a lot of under development countries are now making their way towards being developed. There always will be a few remaining states where the development will reach quite late but major states will show promising development.

The underdeveloped countries can not achieve development if they focus only on the infrastructure and job creation in their nation if they must attain development they must make their nation economy to improve and have different industries working and producing things they can be attracted by other countries, the developed countries are advancing in technology while the underdeveloped countries are still  struggling to create job opportunities it's going to take long to see the underdeveloped countries advancing like the developd countries which are improving in their productivity and industrialization.

[AmoreJaz]

Overall, I think they will. But it takes a lot of time for them. Many underdeveloped nations don't have consistent and continuous progress. Their development is feeble. It may happen that a decade of gains after tiny forward steps could be quickly erased after electing a wrong leader. Then, they will have to go back to square one.

There might come a time when they'll improve and get out of their abject condition, but they might remain as underdeveloped because by the time they've started, say, providing books for each pupil, the developed countries have already switched to something more advance.

Most under developed nations have their corruption problem, the reason why it is very hard for them to move forward. The government itself is the problem not the people. There are so many small countries with very limited resources and yet they are already progressive countries. And that means, any country can get out of like being in the third world depending on the officials that will handle their country.

[Zoomic]

Development is a good thing to every nation that wants to develop.building of good schools, hospitals, good security network, human capital development, good roads,a better environment to leave and do business, job creation, shunning nepotism, favoritism, free and fair election etc are all ingredients of developed nations . the reverse is the case for under developed countries.So can the under developed countries get it right?

No, they cannot get it right because of the following reasons;
1. The under developed countries are already behind in technology
2. Their leaders keep recycling their fellow corrupt friends and colleagues to continue the under development by looting the national treasury.
3. The followers are fight one another because of regional and religious difference, living their true enemy.
4. Their colonizers benefit from their underdeveloped state by exploiting their natural resources.
There is no hope except revolution.

[Darker45]

~snip~

Most under developed nations have their corruption problem, the reason why it is very hard for them to move forward. The government itself is the problem not the people. There are so many small countries with very limited resources and yet they are already progressive countries. And that means, any country can get out of like being in the third world depending on the officials that will handle their country.

There's probably corruption everywhere. There's corruption in both developed and underdeveloped nations. It's just that in most underdeveloped nations corruption is so rampant that what goes into public services is what little left after every politician fills his/her pocket.

No, it's not the government; it's the people. The government can only be as good as the people. The government is a reflection of the people. It doesn't have a soul of its own. It's the people that form the government.

[bitwalhr]

There's probably corruption everywhere. There's corruption in both developed and underdeveloped nations. It's just that in most underdeveloped nations corruption is so rampant that what goes into public services is what little left after every politician fills his/her pocket.

No, it's not the government; it's the people. The government can only be as good as the people. The government is a reflection of the people. It doesn't have a soul of its own. It's the people that form the government.

Corruption and weak structures are the biggest problems in developing countries which fail to achieve long-term success despite having essential resources and a skilled workforce.
Most countries struggle to bring about changes to their education systems as they recognize its importance for success few countries in Africa have sufficient resources to support good development but internal issues hinder their progress these nations have never been on track to achieve success.
Awareness is crucial as developing countries that fail to utilize their resources effectively will be vulnerable to exploitation by developed countries which can limit their ability to succeed in the long run.*

[Dogedegen]

There's probably corruption everywhere. There's corruption in both developed and underdeveloped nations. It's just that in most underdeveloped nations corruption is so rampant that what goes into public services is what little left after every politician fills his/her pocket.

Yes but also no, you understand it wrongly. If there are 10 thieves and there is a $100 budget, they may steal $90 or even $99 because each gets a small portion. If there are 10 thieves and there is a $100 000 budget, they may steal only 10% and be satisfied from this single plunder. In the second case even if they stole only 10% compared to 99% in the first case, each thief gets 100 times more money!

Corruption is rampant in developed nations, but there are 2 key differences. First is that it is much smarter, involving NGOs, kickbacks, board membership and other deals. Second is that there is a much larger pile of money from which you can steal. As I have demonstrated 2 cases, the theft will be much more obvious in the first one than in the second one. Sure there is probably a bit more corruption and stealing in undeveloped countries, but this is not a primary factor it is more secondary.

No, it's not the government; it's the people. The government can only be as good as the people. The government is a reflection of the people. It doesn't have a soul of its own. It's the people that form the government.

I am not sure that I can agree with this. Maybe a majority of the people in a country? I am not sure even about that. The most consistent complaint that I hear about governments everywhere is corruption.