what is the difference between developed and developing country ?
598197
A developed country will have the major technological advancements, good roads, a stable government, stable communication devices, etc.\n\nA developing county is working to attain these things, but may not have reached them yet in some or all areas. These countries sometimes can be third world countries or once third world countries that are now better. Coutnries that have been stricken by war, disease, poverty, famine, natural disasters, etc. usually fall into this category.
1129451
The most important thing that can be done by developed countries is to mediate conflicts; if a developing country is in civil disorder like most of Africa, all the other aid that is given will be completely useless. However, this does not mean settling a conflict no matter what the cost. For instance, if a rebel group \n(or the government for that matter) is terrorizing society for its own gain, forcing a 'national unity' government can be the worst thing that can be done. Just because a group is in rebellion or in control does not mean they have a legitimate claim to power.\n\nAfter that, the BEST thing a developed country can do is to help create a stable currency in the developing country. If the developing country cannot pay its police and soldiers, even if they are good people they will have to find other means of feeding their families (this could mean selling their weapons and equipment to war lords, stealing, accepting bribes from criminals etc). Once the police and soldiers find they have to become bandits, the cost to society is horrendous.
260913
In World Politics circles, the term Third World is outdated. It was used to refer to the African and Asian nations that were newly independent following World War II. During the Cold War, it also referred to nations that refused to align with either of the rivaling world powers (US and USSR). The First World referred to the developed nations especially the United States and its allies. The Second World referred to those nations that were in the former USSR's sphere of influence as well as Russia. The current 'politically correct' but ambiguous terms to use are developed, less developed, developing, under-developed and resource-rich.
313837
Inspite of heavy economical growth India is still become a Developing country. Some parts of India are grown but maximum parts are still below the standard. Specially North Eastern States of India, Bihar, UP, Some parts of West Bengal, Orissa etc. But it is fact that India is growing. And foreign investors are like to come here. And the economy of India is going to be a strong economy. But still India is developing counrty.
155269
economic development -  the analysis of the economic progress of nations.
82541
To answer your question : technically speaking, it's a developING country; however I find it much more developed than many (theoretically) developed countries I've seen.\nA note for ku_lok : it's actually the other way round.\nA note for diehard : what makes you say that?????
1139866
A third world country these days usually refers to a developing country. IOW third world means a poor country with a low standard of living, limited healthcare, limited education and so forth.\n\nThere used to be second world countries, but not any more.\n\nAfter the second world war the world was described as being divided in two. The first world consisted of the westernised capitalist nations headed by the US and England but including Japan, Australia, Canada and so forth. The second world was the communist bloc headed by the USSR and China but including Poland, Cuba, Vietnam, Poland and so forth.\n\nThe term "Third World" was coined to describe all those nations that were not strongly aligned with either camp. Initially this referred to nations such as India and Egypt or Chile that were quite happy to do business with Russia or America based entirely on who gave them the most aid. Eventually the term expanded to refer to all the poor nations.\n\nSo basically "First World" = westernised capitalist nations, "Second World" = communist nations, "Third World" = poor nations not aligned with either first or second world powers.\n\nThese days there aren't really any second world nations. China is the only communist power left, and it is becoming so capitalistic so fast that it hardly deserves the title communist. The remaining handful of communist nations such as Cuba and North Korea are so weak that they don't warrant the term 'second world'. Today we really only refer to first and third world, with Cuba for example considered to be squarely third world.\n\n\nMore commonly we simply refer to developed and developing world.
828516
http://www.bbc.co.uk/\nclick the countries tab on top and read about a country\n-----\ntry not to compare developed and developing nations: its bound to be different\ntry the cliche INDIA vs CHINA\nor better yet, Japan vs China or China vs Taiwan
1052049
Without communication it would be impossible to develop a country.  You need to know what the needs of the people are and develop accordingly as there is no single formula for development - don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
83291
Theoretically it is to help poor countries develop.  In reality the governments lose their autonomy by having to follow the rules of those who are "helping".  Often at the expense of the citizens and more to the reward of the "helping" country.  The biggest offender being the United States.
610080
The so-called developed nations (those that we think of as capitalist) are the first world nations. Countries with state planned economies (such as those under communist regimes) are the second world nations.  Third world nations are those we think of as under-developed or just plain poor.  The United States is a first world nation.  The old Soviet Union was a second world nation, as is current Cuba.  Zimbabwe, Chad, Honduras, Bolivia, and many others are third world examples.\nFirst world nations are no longer truly, purely capitalistic.  They are now highly planned economies that cater to coprorate designs (such as a push for a one-world socialistic economy, and therefore dictatorship).  Nationalism is a GOOD thing: it nurtures TRUE FREEDOM!
573266
LEDC  = less economically developed country, MEDC = more economically developed country
1038157
Unhappily, most "developing nations" are corrupt.  Billions have been spent on them, only to have the bucks stolen and/or misdirected and/or misspent.  Further, a bunch of them have an environment rife with disease and degradation.  It is a very formidable enterprise to "help develop" such places.\n\nSo I would say that what would be most effective is to promote self development strategies, which would mean self-cleansing of corruption, to start.  Once that has been well enough tackled, then these nations should prioritize their development with the view that the people need to work, and to work, they need decent food, clothing, health care, and education.
678933
i m 26,deaf from india and i dont have job \nonly when people like me can earn for themselves only then can the country be called developed
472270
Geographic information can give hints about the country's recources, economy, and even culture. You can use the geographical information to find trends in the country and use that to improve many aspects the developing country. It also allows you to prevent any negative aspects caused by location.
395664
Why not every other developed country is corrupt?
500421
There are literally hundreds if not thousands of areas where globalization affects development\nEconomic, Social, political, environmental.\n\nYou need to more clearly define your question. Macro or micro? Statistical or anecdotal?\n\nI might research sources including the UN, World Economic Forum, IMF, World Bank, Greenpeace, Amnesty International, US Department of Commerce and its European Union Counterpart, The Asia Pacific Economic Council (APEC), the Organization of American States (OAS), and The Nature Conservancy to name a few