Originally posted by vito_corleone:
singapore is not regarded by the rest of the world as "first
world", anyway the classification of 1st,2nd and 3rd world no
longer exists fyi its a cold war era grading system. countries are
now known only as developed and developing countries. the only
country in asia to be recognised as a "developed" country is japan.
the rest are all considered "developing" 
Which source did you depend on for
your opinion made so boldly ?
Surely not from your "First Year
notes" to make comments about the "First World" ?
You are only partially correct that this term came about during the
period after WW-2 but it is not a Cold War era grading
system.
A simple reference to Wikipedia will give you the following
explanation about the "First World
The subjective terms First World, Second World, and Third World
were used to divide the nations of Earth into three broad
categories. The three terms did not arise simultaneously.
After World War II, people began to speak of the NATO and Warsaw
Pact countries as two major blocs, often using such terms as the
"Western bloc" and the "Eastern bloc." The two "worlds" were not
numbered. It was eventually pointed out that there were a great
many countries that fit into neither category, and in the 1950s
this latter group came to be called the Third World.
Eventually, nations within the Western European and United States'
sphere of influence (e.g., the NATO countries) came to be called
(unofficially) the First World. Besides North America (USA and
Canada) and Western Europe, the First World also included other
industrialized capitalist countries such as Japan and some of the
former British colonies, particularly Australia, New Zealand, and
South Africa.
There were a number of countries that did not fit comfortably into
this neat definition of partition, including Switzerland, Sweden,
and the Republic of Ireland, who chose to be neutral. Finland was
under the Soviet Union's sphere of influence but was not communist,
nor was it a member of the Warsaw Pact. Austria was under the
United States' sphere of influence, but in 1955, when the country
became a fully independent republic, it did so under the influence
that it remain neutral. Turkey, which joined NATO in 1952, was not
predominantly in Western Europe and was not industrialized. Spain
did not join NATO until 1982, towards the end of the Cold War and
after the death of the authoritarian dictator Francisco
Franco.
In modern usage, after the end of the Cold War, the term First World has come to denote the 'developed'
Industrialized-Capitalistic nations that in 2000 had
a higher GDP per capita than
$15,000, as stated by the World
Bank. This would include the United States, Canada, Japan, the
countries of the European Union (in 2000), Norway, Iceland,
Switzerland, Singapore,
Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan
(The Republic of China), and South Korea. The World Bank also
denotes these as "High Income Economies."[1]
In recent years, as many "developing" countries have
industrialized, the term Fourth World has been coined to refer to
countries that have "lagged behind" and still lack industrial
infrastructure. However, these are completely subjective terms
usually used by people from economically dominant nations.
Some nations have developed their own classification scheme
consisting of the "Third World," and the "Two-Thirds World." This
system is similar to the former in that it also reflects economic
status or behaviour. In terms of material resources, the "Third
World" takes just one third of the pie, while the "Two-Thirds
World" unjustifiably takes two-thirds of the pie.
Was Singapore mistakenly classified
as a "First
World" based on the assumption that it has a GDP of
US$15,000 ?
Could Singaporeans be enjoying a GDP of US$15,000 or has this come
about through the small number of Elite Class (including the
Ministers) earning a disproportionately huge sum that is
a hundred time larger than
the entire earnings of Singapore wage earners ?
Could Singapore fit into the following clarification of a "Third
World"
Third World is a term first coined in 1952 by French demographer
Alfred Sauvy to distinguish nations that aligned themselves with
neither the West nor with the Soviet Bloc during the Cold
War.
Today, however, the term
is frequently used to denote nations with a low UN Human
Development Index (HDI), independent of their
political status (meaning that the PRC, Russia and Brazil, all of
which were very strongly aligned during the Cold War, are often
termed third world). However, there is no objective definition of
Third World or "Third World country" and the use of the term
remains common. Some in academia see it as being out of date,
colonialist, othering and inaccurate; its use has continued,
however.
In general, Third World countries are not as industrialized or
technologically advanced as OECD countries, and therefore in
academia, the more politically correct term to use is "developing
nation".
Terms such as Global South, less wealthy nations, developing
countries, least developed countries and the Majority World have
become more popular in circles where the term "third world" is
regarded to have derogatory or out-of-date connotations.
Development workers also call them the two-thirds world (because
two-thirds of the world is underdeveloped) and The South. The term
Third World is also disliked as it may imply the false notion that
those countries are not a part of the global economic system. Some
claim that the underdevelopment of Africa, Asia and South America
during the Cold War was influenced, or even caused by the Cold War
economic, political, and military maneuverings of the most powerful
nations of the time. (See Emerging markets)
The term Fourth World (as least developed countries) is used by
some writers to describe the poorest Third World countries, those
which lack industrial infrastructure and the means to build it.
More commonly, however, the term is used to describe indigenous
peoples or other oppressed minority groups within First World
countries.
Is the Singapore economy developed to
a level which allow us to compete with the likes of other
industrialized countries classified as First World or Developed World ?
Or is the present Singapore economy an illusion that is dependent
on the inputs from Foreign Talents in niche high tech sectors of
the economy, and which local Singaporeans can hardly contribute due
to non-existent knowledge and exposure.
