Nose

why are there so many people in the world without food, water, school and doctors?
for people living in the rich countries talking about development usually means feeling sorry for poor people in poor countries, or feeling happy about pop stars or polticians who say they have done something to help them. but, if you look at it another way, all of the human race is development..
twenty years agethe world was divided into three parts. the first world was the rich countries of western europe, north america an japan. the soviet union and countries closely connected with it made another different world, an then there was the thirdworld countries which had to choose wich side they were on. the third world did not get its name for bling poor but for being outside of the war, or in fact theplaces where the cold war could turn into a real one.
then the second world disappeared. this meant that poor countries were only left with one choice if they wanted to get riches doing business with everyone else on the planet. many of the poorest countries got professional help to do this from the international.
monetary fund, the world bank and other organisations. there organisations lent themmoney and told them what kind of political changes to make in their country.
during the same period the economies of the rich countries have been changing. a lot of industries heve closed down or been moved abroad.there has been a big increase in the employment of people who provide services complicated services like investments or insurance and simple ones like sandwiches. its clearly not truethat there countries have finished developing, in fact they are changing faster and faster with avery new technology and fashion.
development is happening every where around the and it has started to be called globatisation. there is a serious argument that this process is unfair and that it is causing a lot of poverty in poor countries and in rich ones.
some of the anti-globalist are really notinterested about economics at all. however, the economic parts of the argument go something like this:
international trade is good for a minority of people who receive the profits from big transactions. these rich people tend to spend or save their money in the capitals of rich countries, so they dont do much to help people in their of own countries. the worst situation accur in areas wherethere are no resources that the rest of the world wants to buy. international trade cant help these countries at all.
the worlds wealth ends up going to the richuts organisations in the richest countries the banks and the big companies that are involved in international trade. it leave the poor countries either to pay back loans or to buy expansive luxuries, weapons and other things that only thefirst world produces.

¿por qué hay tanta gente en el mundo sin comida, agua, escuela y los médicos?
las personas que viven en los países ricos hablando de desarrollo por lo general significa sentir lástima por los pobres en los países pobres, o sentirse feliz por estrellas del pop o polticians que dicen que han hecho algo para ayudarlos. pero, si lo miras de otra manera, todos los de la razahumana es el desarrollo ..
veinte años de edad el mundo estaba dividido en tres partes. el primer mundo fueron los países ricos de Europa Occidental, América del Norte un japón. la Unión Soviética y los países en estrecho vínculo con éste hizo otro mundo diferente, un entonces todavía era el tercer mundo los países que tuvieron que elegir de qué lado estaban. el tercer mundo no recibió su nombre porBling pobres, sino por estar fuera de la guerra, de hecho o de los lugares donde la guerra fría podría convertirse en una real.
a continuación, el segundo mundo desaparecido. esto significaba que los países pobres se quedaron sólo con una opción si querían obtener riquezas hacer negocios con todos los demás en el planeta. muchas de las países más pobres recibieron ayuda profesional para hacer...