IMO, The US has crumbling infrastructure, corrupt government, dangerous cities, and a lot of homelessness, among so many other problems. Hell, millions of people in the US don’t even have power right now.

What’s the difference?

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      The US usually ranks 25-50 on world corruption indices. Third world countries rank 100-200.

      That would mean that the US is more corrupt. I’m pretty sure that’s not what you meant, so I’m just adding this to help.

      I don’t know if it’s a language thing or a regional thing (or just a regular mistake), but “rank” usually means that 1 is the most, 2 is the second most, and 100th would be less corrupt than 1, 2, etc.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          You’re right, they’ve ordered it that way, but they’ve specified that their scale is…

          [scored] on a scale of 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean)

          So you weren’t wrong about what you read.

          But without that context there, being “in the top ten of a corruption ranking” would usually mean the country is very corrupt, haha

  • edric@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Have you ever lived in an actual third world country? Here’s some from my home country for each of your examples:

    • Corruption in government is worse and more blatant than what you see in the US. It happens at the top all the way down to the lowest levels. You sometimes have to bribe people just to get some services done. I once had to have a police report done for an auto accident. The officer had the report typed up and they just needed to click the print button. He then said I can pay a quick process “fee” to get the report now, or come back to get the report in 3 days. It was an hour drive to the station, but I didn’t want to pay a bribe, so I came back after 3 days.

    • Infrastructure is crumbling not just because of lack of maintenance, but because the cheapest materials are used and infrastructure is not built up to code. Every step of the process means a cut for someone’s own pockets, so you end up with a tiny amount compared to what was initially funded. Perfectly functioning roads are destroyed and rebuilt in perpetuity because contractors are in cahoots with local government to implement “projects” where they fleece funds by agreeing on a budget then switching materials to substandard quality and pocketing the remaining amount, with the politician getting a % of course. A section of the street in my childhood home is still unpaved 30+ years later just because no one bothered to finish it.

    • Homeless people in the US may still have access to food banks, shelters, charities, etc. Homeless people in thrid world countries may have nothing at all.

    • People lose power in the US due to catastrophies. We had random 12 hour blackouts and water shut-offs several times a month for no reason at all. Water isn’t potable in the entire country and you have to boil or buy water from filter stations if you want to be safe.

    • markr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      You’ve doctored your first two points to avoid the fact that widespread corruption and crumbling infrastructure are in fact a feature of the USA. That said, obviously we are not a ‘third world’ country, nor a ‘developing or under-developed’ country. We are, instead in our own special category of fucked. We have an absolutely giant economy, but as we have decided politically to disinvest in all of our public sectors, either by privatization or under-funding, we are rapidly becoming dysfunctional. Add to that the huge global reclaiming of surplus value from workers wages to plutocrats profits, and we are, as is obvious, in a political crisis shared by the rest of the neoliberal democracies.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    6 months ago

    Third World is an outdated term to refer to neutral countries in the cold war.

    Unless there was a sudden dramatic shift in US geopolitical policy it would literally be impossible for it to be considered third world, as the very definition of third world as the definition inherently implies that the country in question is not allied with the US and the broader Western World.

    Austria and Switzerland were third world, technically Yugoslavia was too. China became third world for a decent stretch after the sino-soviet split since the other half of the definition relies on not being allied with the Soviets in particular.

    The use of third world as an insult for poor countries is a neo-colonial mindset that just takes for granted that anyone who isn’t an outright ally of the west or of the Russians must just be too poor to be worth considering as anything but uneducated people in dirt houses living subsistence lifestyles and who’s main interaction with an apparatus of state is occasionally seeing a humvee loaded up with the child soldiers of this warlord or that drive by.

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Languages evolve over time, all dictionaries now have OPs use of the word as the first definition.

            • Grimy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Oh 100%, I’m just saying his use of the word is in no way wrong like half the comments seem to imply. Everyone knew exactly what he meant and the definition is in most dictionaries.

              This seems to pop up everytime the word is used and it’s a major pet peeve of mine.

              My comment is only aimed at those that think third world only means the historical definition when that hasn’t been the case for at least two decades. The word third world is almost always used to mean developing country in day to day conversation.

      • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I guess I still go by the original definition. There are other words that offer more detail anyway - kakistocracy, gerontocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocracy, etc.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Developing countries would be the synonym for third world in the definition used by OP.

      • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I agree language is descriptive and not prescriptive, but it sounds like comparing two categories developing vs developed may be more apt and not three like an updated 3 world model would entail. Or maybe I just find it unsettling to call something a third without referencing a third of something.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because “first world” means NATO, not having a high standard of living.

  • mecfs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If you mean “developped” vs “develloping”.

    The HDI of the US is significantly lower than canada or northern europe, but still much higher than the world average.

    Here’s an Inequality Adjusted version of the Human Development index, the US comes 27th, below Estonia and Cyprus, but 27th out of nearly 200 is counted as “develloped”.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index&diffonly=true

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also, the “developed” vs. “developing” terminology doesn’t really have a category that fits a country that was previously developed and is now declining.

  • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because the definition of “first world” is “aligned with the US during the Cold War”, second world was aligned with the USSR, third world were countries not significant on the global stage. It correlates with but does not require poverty or dictatorships.

  • Steve@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    6 months ago

    Several reasons.

    1. The US is largely responsible for defining what 1st, 2nd, and 3rd World countries are.
    2. It has the largest economy in the world.
      (I think? That may have gone to China by now. Not sure. But it was true recently.)
    3. Even with everything you said being true. It’s still the wealthiest country in the world, by a large margin. Epically when you compare incomes, lifestyles, and infrastructure to actual 3rd world countries. It’s not even close.
  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Because the “third world” doesn’t mean what people think it means. It’s cold war terminology. First World is western aligned nations, Second World is Eastern bloc, Third World is nonaligned with the eastern or western nations. FBFW it meant nations that generally weren’t powerful or wealthy enough to be of interest to either East or West, and that poverty often meant they really had a lot of infrastructure and other problems. That’s why we’re not “Third World”, it’s a geopolitical alignment, not a quality of how we treat our citizens and infrastructure. So we’re First World even if our country is turning into a shithole in some ways.

  • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because of their GDP. People are incredibly rich there. But one false move and there are no safety nets. You can get bankrupt in an instant.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It’s mostly the stable government, infrastructure, currency and tech.

    Pretty much why I’ve been calling the US a 3rd world country for years.

    Your"IMO" aren’t opinions; those are the facts, jack

    IMO, no country that primarily uses toilet paper instead of a bidet is 1st world.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        My guess is Lemmy skews young.

        so many of these revelations and showerthoughts are pretty banal coming of age stuff.

    • mean_bean279@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      The country most famous for the bidet trend is France and currently swimming in the Seine is still looking impossible. If my infrastructure is so shitty and 3rd world here at least my lakes, rivers and water ways are all clean enough for me to use.

      Every country has its problems, but calling the US 3rd world is just your brain being full of straight negative propaganda. Simultaneously not every French River is unusable or every country filled with Bidets an actual mark of their progress. Go experience a country first before just talking shit.

      Also, stable government?? Literally our biggest problem is that our government has been so stable that it has changed for 240 years.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The US has the clean water act - correct.

        “at least my lakes, rivers and water ways are all clean enough for me to use”. - very, very wrong.

        Many of your waterways are so polluted that they regularly catch fire and are linked to higher cancer rates

        Then there’s “The country most famous for the bidet trend is France and currently swimming in the Seine is still looking impossible”,

        which, if we

        1. ignore Japan

        2. pretend fecal matter is only unsanitary if you clean yourself with water(incorrect)

        3. and follow your implication that because bidets were popularized in one country, part of a single river in their country is historically dangerously polluted(incorrect),

        makes as much sense as

        “The country most famous for TP is the US and currently the Mississippi, Ohio River and Savannah are and will be polluted for decades to come, plus the Cuyahoga river and also US drinking water catches on fire sometimes.”

        How about

        “If my infrastructure is so shitty”

        No “ifs” about it, American infrastructure is crumbling. Your power grids regularly fail and are vulnerable because of their age, your bridges are collapsing, people can’t easily travel the country because of undeveloped mass transit, your health care system has failed its population, and you can’t house or feed even your veterans, let alone large parts of your population.

        Those are all direct evidence of a critical failure in US infrastructure.

        “Also, stable government??” Putting aside that your standard for stability is

        “our government has been so stable that it has changed for 240 years.”(I have no idea what you’re going for here),

        Your corrupt presidents, senators, congressmen, governors and citizens regularly cry out for secession and civil war, regularly attempt to defraud your electoral system and literally attempted a violent coup to overthrow your governmental seat of power just three years ago.

        Trump, liable for rape and treason, constitutionally prohibited from running for president, might be re-elected, despite his admiration for and aspiration to emulate authoritarian regimes(and so many other faults).

        Not the picture of stability. The picture of instability, in fact.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Pretty much why I’ve been calling the US a 2nd world country for years.

      FYI, “second world” means communist – or more specifically, Warsaw Pact. Only delusional MAGAs would call the US that.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Done with my business!

        Should I use my own hand covered by a strip of absorbent tissue paper to smear waste over my skin?

        Or wash it away with water without touching my waste with my hand?

        What a dilemma.

  • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because of very high GDP per capita. It’s another discussion whether GDP is a reliable measure of economy output.

  • dch82@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    I 100% agree; the thing is they measure this stuff by the mean so a few outliers (rich districts or billionaires) make things look reasonable by number.