Are India, Brazil, and China "third world" nations?

[last light]

Serious question. I've seen disagreement about what it means to be a third world nation (I understand some of the problems with that term itself). I admit that I'm not very education in these types of discussions.

[chlorinated]

Some related thoughts for your consideration (sorry, I'm not clarifying anything or answering your question)
---
To add one country to this topic:  what about the United States?  Like India and Brazil, there is a (growing) deep divide between rich and middle class/poor.  The coverage of Hurricane Katrina highlighted the extent to which America's poverty exists.  An interesting comparison could include other countries garnering "first world" status, like Norway and Sweden, which seem to have no poverty.

If Brazil, China, and India are truly "third world" and Norway and Sweden are "first world", where does the US fall?  And is there a "fourth world" category for countries like Haiti and Cambodia?

[obamacon]

Some related thoughts for your consideration (sorry, I'm not clarifying anything or answering your question)
---
To add one country to this topic:  what about the United States?  Like India and Brazil, there is a (growing) deep divide between rich and middle class/poor.  The coverage of Hurricane Katrina highlighted the extent to which America's poverty exists.  An interesting comparison could include other countries garnering "first world" status, like Norway and Sweden, which seem to have no poverty.

If Brazil, China, and India are truly "third world" and Norway and Sweden are "first world", where does the US fall?  And is there a "fourth world" category for countries like Haiti and Cambodia?

You've got to be kidding.

1. The divide in the United States is between the rich ($40,000 is incredible money worldwide) and the obscenely rich.
2. Hurricane Katrina is an absolutely awful example.
3. Norway has 5 million residents, Sweden has 10 million which, among other things, make them poor standards to judge a country of some 300 million by.

[last light]

I've read that suggest that nations considered "third world" is more about economic dependence rather than economic development, and moreover, that what nation is and is not "third world" is more political than anything else (something to do with political alignment during the Cold War, and that Brazil and China have "observer status" in the Non-Aligned Movement, and that India is a full member).

I'm trying to sort all of this out, but it's hard because so many believe the term "third world" as extremely problematic.

[chlorinated]

Some related thoughts for your consideration (sorry, I'm not clarifying anything or answering your question)
---
To add one country to this topic:  what about the United States?  Like India and Brazil, there is a (growing) deep divide between rich and middle class/poor.  The coverage of Hurricane Katrina highlighted the extent to which America's poverty exists.  An interesting comparison could include other countries garnering "first world" status, like Norway and Sweden, which seem to have no poverty.

If Brazil, China, and India are truly "third world" and Norway and Sweden are "first world", where does the US fall?  And is there a "fourth world" category for countries like Haiti and Cambodia?

You've got to be kidding.

1. The divide in the United States is between the rich ($40,000 is incredible money worldwide) and the obscenely rich.
2. Hurricane Katrina is an absolutely awful example.
3. Norway has 5 million residents, Sweden has 10 million which, among other things, make them poor standards to judge a country of some 300 million by.

1 & 3.  Yes, true.
2.  How so?  I only mentioned it because it is a recent event, representing the first(?) time that much of the world became aware of the third world-like conditions within parts of the United States.

I'm obviously pretty ignorant on the topic but am adding my thoughts/questions (as someone who lived in Brazil for several years and has visited nearly all of the countries listed so far in this post) in the hope other people will take the reins and turn this into an interesting discussion.

[last light]

Well, I anticipate that some of the more astute board members will (rightfully) quarrel about the term "third world" itself. That's not a discussion I'm interested in now, but rather, if India, China, and Brazil could be considered so under a common understanding of what it means/meant to be "third world".

[chlorinated]

Well, I anticipate that some of the more astute board members will (rightfully) quarrel about the term "third world" itself. That's not a discussion I'm interested in now, but rather, if India, China, and Brazil could be considered so under a common understanding of what it means/meant to be "third world".

So... first question:

What qualities must a nation possess to be considered "third world"?

[CougMan]

Different parts of Brazil have different classifications.
In general I would say that Brazil is definitely third world, but there are parts of Brazil that are unequivocally first world.

[Tuttipoopoo]

This article pretty much answers all your questions:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World

[obamacon]

2.  How so?  I only mentioned it because it is a recent event, representing the first(?) time that much of the world became aware of the third world-like conditions within parts of the United States.

Perhaps you should compare the Katrina disaster to Jeanne in Haiti (which is a 3rd world/4th world/LDC)

The New Orleans area was most affected by Katrina which hit there as a Catagory 3 Hurricane
The city of Gonaïves, Haiti was most affected by Jeanne which hit there with a strength of a Tropical Storm/Tropical Depression

New Orleans had a metro population of 1.3 million
Gonaïves had a population of 100,000 before Jeanne.

New Orleans lost around 1,500
Gonaïves  lost 2,826

That is, New Orleans lost .12% of its population in a Cat 3 (120mph winds) while Gonaïves lost 2.84% of its population (or roughly 24 times the percentage lost in NO) in a Tropical Storm (50mph winds)