Richest country and poorest country in the world?

Question

and why.

Answer 1

The richest country in the world is Luxembourg with a GDP per capita of $68,500.  The poorest country in the world is Malawi with a GDP per capita of $600.

Answer 2

richest counrty united states

dont know

poorest is hard to decide because there is so many poor countries in this world

Answer 3

Poorest country is Niger. Its a sun baked sandbox whose people barely produce enough to eat (and they starve every few years). No one has time to even learn to write or read.

Richest country is the US. On a per capita basis i think its Lichtenstein or  Iceland.

Answer 4

and if you factor in national debt, as in how much the country owes, per capita, plus individual debt the USA is one of the poorest countries in the world

Answer 5

Richest country is Luxemburg: due to their high economic groth, Gross Domestoc Growth and standard of living.

Poorest country in terms of economic growth would be Zimbabwe: this would most probable be a caues of the countrys civil unrest and low currency. 300 zimbabwean dollars would be equivalent to $US 0.33 cents....... its pretty sad man  

Answer 6

If you are measuring wealth and poverty in $ GDP, then the previous answers all ring true.  USA, Luxembourg, Sweden, Switzerland all come towards the top of the league.  Zimbabwe, Malawi, Niger, Bangladesh and Lesotho come towards the bottom.

However, the $-value of goods is not a reliable comparative measure.  In UK, the statutory minimum wage is about £6 per hour; that's about £9500 per year and it would be very difficult indeed to live on that amount.  In India, the minimum wage is about Rs2200 per month; that's about Rs25000 per year and that equates to about $US 600 or £300.  In India, many people survive and live reasonable on this sum, though not lavishly, and it requires two or more people to be working in a household to live well.

Similar comparisons can be made for other poor countries but not for Zimbzbwe, which is subject to hyper-inflation owing to economic mismangement and a cruel, uncaring, corrupt government.

The differences in comparisons lie in the costs of living.  Basic foodstuffs in poor countries are much cheaper than in high-GDP countries.  Rice will cost one-twenthieth or less of the price in US or Europe.  Flours of various sorts are even cheaper.  Meat is not eaten, by and large, and protein sources are efficient from semi-domestic animals such as goats, chickens and cattle, and from fish caught in the wild.

In India, Malawi, Bangladesh, etc, petrol (gasoline) costs on average about one-third of the price in UK and only about 12 per cent of those populations buys it because they own a car or two-wheeler.  The price of petrol does not figure in the budgets of most families except in the cost of food freight and in public transport.

In India, for example, there is a public rationing support system, so that households falling below a minimum income level receive heavily subsidises basic foods, fuel, transport and so on.  That minimum level is not the poverty line: it is set in such a way that about 20 per cent of the population receives a ration book and therefore the subsidies that are available.

None of this minimises the poverty that exists in many countries but it is important not to restrict our thinking to Western measures of wealth, such as GDP per head in $US.  I think that means that we should be looking for other measures that take into account the costs of living, availablility of government or international support etc.