Will third world countries exist in 100 years?

Aid to the underprivileged appears to be on an upward trajectory. Does this mean that, within a hundred years' time, we will have equalised the earth's resource to the extent that nobody lives in abject poverty?

Conversely, do you feel that growing issues in First World countries will cause us to look inwards, leaving the Third World worse off than ever?

Your answer is for the year 2112. If it helps, consider the differences between 1912 and 2012.

Yes 55
No 15
Maybe 12
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 42 )
  • Twixmix345

    In 100 the US wont be around I'll tell you that. This great nation hit its prime its leak already. Just like every great empire it will fall. The USA is losing all its morals and principles that they started off with. It will always be remembered as the greatest nation in history. But China is next. And nope im not asain. Truth hurts

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • I don't really class the U.S. as a third world country, though.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Carlosolrac

        Sure! Coz its not!

        Comment Hidden ( show )
    • o_0

      i am...(an asian)..you are right china is gona govern... its on its way..!!

      Comment Hidden ( show )
    • Agreed.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • nightmare28

    Third world countries exist due to cultural problems. You can't live in the new world while your head is still in the old. When you live in a hut, got no food or water, don't have any money either yet you make 10 kids because that's what god want's or that's what brings honor to your family, things can't get better. When instead of working together for the good of the society you keep fighting for power, things can't get better. When instead of investing money in education you invest money in religious police, things will go down the hill. When a continent with the most natural resources is the poorest one, you know something is wrong with the culture there.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • o_0

      impressive... but thinks CAN GET BETTER!! HOPE HOPE HOPE!! what if people are longing for development ? what if they just need some resources to use as a stake ... what if they want to be educated but cant afford... that what is general...your point goes for very high and elite class...

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • nightmare28

        What if my grandma would grow some nuts? will she become my grandpa? They been getting help from all around the world for a very long time, the money is spend on weapons, stolen by corrupted authorities. What if a family that lives in a mud hut would only have 2 children instead of ten? maybe they would be able to save up a little, get education. What if a country that have over 10% of its population infected with aids would take some measures? quarantine the infected population so it wont be spread, teach about condoms, or the people would be mature enough to take measures themselves, if they got it, don't spread it, if you don't have it, be careful. But people stick to their old rituals and traditions, I actually heard some interview where a woman claims that if a woman is not circumcised then the clit will go up into the head and kill her. You can't revive a self-destructing culture.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • o_0

          you are right but that is changing now as people are getting educated the no.of children is decreasing( majority)... and a time span of hundred years is enough to split the situation to opposite...isnt it..?/
          use of condoms is hell increasing... new parents try their best to admit their children to best schools, things are changing the only thing is the process is slow but again i say a 100 years is enough...

          Comment Hidden ( show )
    • Carlosolrac

      You may be right when you cite that culture plays a role in those called "3rdWC" but its not just that, it comes much more from the past than from now. You have to remember that several current-rich-countries once depended on the now-poor countries and played slavery and then when they got themselves *up there* they just left behind those other countries in that bad situation taking the whole prize and saying to whoever was able to hear: "we are the champions". And you say "fighting for power" ooo shit.. come on, whoever in the past wanted to show power... if it was not truth there wouldnt have been the so wel known cold war. I know I'm going far... but you have to see it in a whole instead of just "saying it".

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I think that climate change will cause massive droughts and widespread starvation in "third world" countries. It will get so horrible and out of control, that average people in better off nations will just turn a blind eye to it all. I envision the business of supporting those nations drying up as things become tougher on everyone across the globe. It's a dismal outlook (I know) but people are already doing it. I think it's only going to get a lot worse in the next century.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • o_0

      ok but dont forget (for the starvation point) that it is many of the undeveloped countries that provide food and many resources to us ... yeah but if they increase in population then it would happen somehow but if not that then may be thats not the case..

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • howaminotmyself

    I think the term will have changed to "under developed nations."

    And in a hundred years, we will still be searching for balance. Some areas will be better, some will be worse. But it will not be equal.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Trying to separate man from his stupidity is like trying to separate water from the quality of "wet".

    As long as people are foolish and believe idiotic things, there will always be the impoverished.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • I don't understand. What is it that you believe that makes people poor?

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • VioletTrees

    In 100 years? Cute.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Medusa'sPath

    Perfect equality is one of the most unrealistic ideas there is, so yes, there will always be under developed nations.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Legion

    there may still be many poor countries, and they may be different areas from even now. countries now developed may be third world depending on the course of human events by then. Unless, by that time, the whole world becomes governed by a single government, then its all (except a few possibly) or none

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Legion

    Only if the Solar Federation hasnt taken control of everything by then.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • WordWizard

    China will of course! Look they were poor forever before they finally started coming up in recent years.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • o_0

    yeah..!! dont know for other countries but if I exist then my country will for sure exist... cuz i will never let it drown and vanish.. :)

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • GuessWho

    Yes.
    The smart people will all leave and the dumbasses governing them will continue to pocket all the tax money while leaving their people in poverty.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • dom180

    Yes, and the difference in development and technology relative to "first world countries" will probably be the same as it is today.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • dom180

      Maybe I'm being too negative; you'd be wrong to underestimate how much can change in 100 years - especially considering how much has changed in the last 100 years. I still think eradication of nationwide poverty is a step too far but it isn't *impossible*.

      Also, if I'm being very pedantic with semantics, there are no third-world countries in the world *now*. "First/Second/Third-World Country" are examples of Cold War terminology; they're no longer used by the people who actually study that sort of thing. I'm just picking holes for the fun of it though :)

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Lady.Pemberlie

    Sure 3rd world countries could survive. How come they were able to outlived calamities and economic downfalls from the past? What if that happens to the First WC? I bet they would fall faster than economic crisis due to mental depression.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • NeuroNeptunian

    I doubt it. I highly doubt it.

    We can give as much money to aid for countries as possible but there is a reason why many of these countries are the way they are.

    Oppressive governments and oppressive cultures. Talk about the starving kids in Africa? They live in a country where women are seen as objects and to rape a woman is socially acceptable. Woman gets raped, is shamed by her community, has no access to the things that America takes for granted like food stamps or government funded birth control or abortion or even education! Gives birth to a mouth that can't be fed and lives cycles on all the while, whatever wealth and resources that their nation has to offer goes to whoever in power.

    Half the battle for charity organizations and just to establish good enough diplomatic relations with these governments to be able to go to their country and offer aid. A lot of people make ignorant statements about how we need to fund birth control in those countries and hell yeah right! That shit is illegal or at least not socially acceptable there. Most of the countries that have weak or no women's rights (which roughly translates to no children's rights either) are often some of the worst countries for poverty.

    It is not so much an issue of money or resources as it is an issue of shitty social values and shitty governments as well as the constant state of warfare and turmoil caused by aforementioned shitty social values. Maybe if they all stopped fighting, raping and money grubbing long enough to cooperate, they would get shit done but unless they do, there is no hope for those countries no matter how much money we first worlders throw at them. Social and political change needs to happen and I can no see hundreds of years of tribal warfare and social BS changing even in a hundred years.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • fullhouse

    Not only will third world countries cease to exist, all the countries in the world would be united! No boundaries, no religious extremism..
    Its either this or whole world be like a famished country where everyone practises hardline Islam..hehe

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • You make an interesting point. Countries conglomerate for political reasons all the time: the European Union, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States (whose very name implies that each state is a "country", and whose legislature does too).

      But generally, when it is forced, it is later forced apart (the breakup of the USSR is a good example). The EU is vastly threatened by recession and people in countries hit by recession want to get themselves out of recession rather than deepen their recession by helping other EU countries who have been seen to wilfully mismanage their finances, knowing that someone else would bail them out.

      In the case of global warming, extreme overpopulation, and dwindling natural resources, there is little palatable alternative to greater conglomeration and it very well might happen. Which is not to say the unpalatable alternative might also happen. Humans are possessed of mind-blowing selfishness at times.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Glass

    If there's rich, there will be poor as well.

    Unless society gets a major overhaul, I don't see it happening.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Dad

    Yes.

    Not only that, but I'm pretty sure we'll allow euthanasia to the ones that want it, and we will probably place less value on an individual's life, and more value on our own survival.

    I could literally see, mainly through over population and resource and finance, individuals dieing on the street, and no one caring.

    Is that too negative, or is it reality?
    It may not be 100years exactly but very close.
    Our world population presently is 7 Billion individuals
    Back in 1812 it was ONE billion (just ONE)
    In a hundred years from now it will be nearly 20 Billion

    Think about that.
    It took about 5 Billion YEARS for humans to evolve on Earth and at last become 'human' about 200,000 years ago. And in this 5 Billion years Earthtime we have presently multiplied our population by 7, and by 20 in another 100 years. I mean it took billions of years just to get to one billion, and now it presently doubles every 40years!

    Exactly how are schools going to hold 20 more children for each present child in the future? Answer: They won't!

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • o_0

      my god where do you get this much from...info man... impressive info ....you really have much of it..!!

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Dad

        Yes you probably should get involved in this 'info'. Except we actually call them FACTS ;)
        Although the future 'info' is actually if we continue the way we are going. Have they got one child per family where you are yet? Over population and lack of resource is a big concern.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • o_0

          haha no we are four siblings.. and the new couples here have at least two ... and that is also because some serious health reasons or rather they also consider it no problem to have more than that...

          Comment Hidden ( show )
    • Twixmix345

      We dont come from monkeys sorry to disappoint you.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Dad

        Oh, sorry for you its 6,000 years of life on Earth only, and before that obviously even the entire universe didn't exist!
        What are you 5?

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • Twixmix345

          Where you around when life was created? :D. I guess not so who knows when it started. And why are there still apes then if we evolved from them??

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • Carlosolrac

            Were*

            If you evolved from them you still are a ape, but not an evolved one!

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • Twixmix345

              Careful with the grammar police lol. Nope not possible. Pandas transform into Chinese people then? Explain those big animals? And whales? Yeah shutup

              Comment Hidden ( show )
            • Dad

              Yes that's correct Carlosolrac.
              But more to the point the apes we are directly evolved from are now ALL gone.

              Twixmix345's point is the same as saying why are there different fish, or animals or anything!

              Comment Hidden ( show )
  • JuneB

    Yes, but we'll all be talking about how sad it is that they have dial-up internet and flip phones instead of trying to help with all the war and hunger and whatnot because (in my optimistic world-view) they will have overcome those issues by then.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • o_0

      this....

      Comment Hidden ( show )