Could the first world save the third with voluntary charity?

No, what the third-world needs is stability and infrastructure, which would require a lot more than "voluntary charity". But the world powers benefit from having an underclass of nations, they need places to make shit cheaply and then sell it back later.

What are you on about? I'm arguing against the notion that they are bums. They work more hours on average and get paid less - so your goods produced there are cheaper to you than they would be if they were produced here where workers are more protected.

>African King Living in Germany Rules His People via Skype
odditycentral.com/news/african-king-living-in-germany-rules-his-people-via-skype.html

It's not a population problem, it's a socio-economic problem. Far too many people are born into poverty and cannot rise out of it because they do not have the resources provided to them to be able to change. Just telling people not to have so many kids isn't going to be the answer to saving 3rd world countries or even solve the over population problem. It will only become less of a problem when the majority of the population is on equal socio-economic footing and able to change with access to vital resources that they need.

That of the shock, are you saying that 1st world countries are using cheap labor to make cheap products to sell back on prices that the local workforce cannot compete against?
i think that was a well known fact
have you compared the wages these so called sweatshops pay to their workers in comparison to the local independent businesses?
they make more from the foreign abusers who still make a killing in the global trade
now as for them meddling and trying to keep places like Africa purposefully backwards so they can keep doing that, i highly doubt that
Africans are just really really backwards, they have problems with south African white farmers, they kick them out and seize the means of production with cheers from the local population that screams "fuck off whites, Africa is ours!", doesn't take long these idiots realize, "ay yo we don't know how to use any of this shit they left behind" after which they basically go "hey white farmers, we know we wuz mad and all, but won't you come back... friend?"
not saying we are doing as much to help them grow as we could, we clearly aren't but are they beyond help? that is the real question, how do you civilize them and bring them to the 1st world club?
>cool rant brah
i know rite

No one is willing one's standards of living. I am certainly not willing and most of those claiming to be willing or even doing activism towards that end in the end aren't.

Third world countries that are able, like China, will develop to a degree. They don't need our help and we wouldn't grant any significant help anyway.

Resources will get depleted faster and faster and the environment will degrade further and further until a global crisis causes a massive cull through war/starvation/etc...

Then the cycle will start again. It will probably be shorter because of the degraded environment.

Communism won't happen or any other utopian solution. Just hope the crisis happens after you die.

> wow we have a lot of oil, let's keep the prices low to sell more and fix our shit country
> nope mohammad, don't even dare to be competitive or else I give you a good dose of democracy and destroy your ressources

Capitalism needs poor people to mantain itself. Developing the whole world equally is utopic.

This

*is willing to lower one's standards of living* my bad.

>ameridumb thinks the third world is poor because they just don't work hard enough

>Are there enough resources for everyone?

Yes but that requires sacrifice and the first world to give up their advantage on the world and potential to fall into irrelevancy in the case of Europe.

not through charity but through fair trade and shared technology
My country is 3 million but can produce food for 50 millions

>through fair trade and shared technology

Charity does help in a lot of cases but fair trade is a meme and there are a lot of inequalities in the global system in regards to trade, subsidies, power etc.

Good luck getting people to actually engage on equal footing. Many rich nations industries are propped up artificially when they should have died ages ago.

>yurohammad thinks that foreign aid doesn't intentionally destroy emerging economies

Charity doesn't do shit. If anything it harms the economy.

Not all foreign aid is bad and it's pretty foolish to suggest so.

How is an Kenyan and Brazilian cotton farmer supposed to compete with the U.S with their massive subsidies and deflating the price.

Giving isn't the only type of Charity