AHC US Third World Country In Terms Of Living Standards?

Tough one.

I do recall a economics writer in the Wall Street Journal circa 1990 referring to West Virginia as a third world nation. surrounded by the US and run by the Rockafellers. I don't know about that last, but having traveled thru if many times previously and stopped there as many times I could see his point from the condition of it.
 
Hmm,
how about something like this: Nixon's economy goosing in his first term goes wrong; however the goosing lasts long enough for OTL landslide in 1972. The economy pops just as Watergate,Vietnam,and race tensions are at a height. It all spirals from there.
 
well several factors need to happen.

1. keep infrastructure projects low outside of major cities.
There are plenty of nations where the cities are just fine but if you get out the villages - well that's another story

1a: keep labor rights away - keep the people poor and hungry

2. have the economic bubble burst again - say post WWII - the building boom that took place really did a lot to build infrastructure after the war.
Or you could have Korea continue and get even more ugly ( have it turn into an earlier Vietnam and then bleed into Vietnam - with the USA concentrating and unable to roll back from military war footing - there would be less money to spend on infrastructure.

3. Race Riots are worse - more cities burn

4.. requires geologic PODS - The USA had a fair amount of mineral wealth. cheap oil and gas allowed for air conditioning in the south.

Honestly The USA is very big and diverse place so having the nation be 3rd world is pretty tough outside of a Yellowstone event.
Even Russia isn't third world. so what is your definition of third world?
 
Tough one.

I do recall a economics writer in the Wall Street Journal circa 1990 referring to West Virginia as a third world nation. surrounded by the US and run by the Rockafellers. I don't know about that last, but having traveled thru if many times previously and stopped there as many times I could see his point from the condition of it.

West Virginia does indeed have many issues, but using HDI as a measure, it's only slightly behind the entire nation of Italy (and ahead of Southern Italy for that matter).

Spend some time outside the major cities.
Not true at all. The state of Mississippi has the lowest HDI in the country, and it's still 0.866, which is about that of Poland. The poorest counties in Mississippi, in the Mississippi Delta, are somewhat behind the Mississippi state average, but I can only find American HDI stats for them (which is a different measure based on the same concept). Odds are they aren't much less than 0.8, still falling into "High" Human Development. It's likely a similar story with the most impoverished parts of Appalachia (i.e. Owsley County, Kentucky).

What I'm also curious about is the HDI in certain inner city neighborhoods and Indian reservations (which do have the violence typical of parts of the third world). There I think the statistics would show a pretty low HDI given the (functional) illiteracy, infant mortality/life expectancy, etc., but that's just a fragment of the country where driving a few blocks away/county over would show something very different.

In all cases these places are heavily subsidised by the government thanks to welfare programs.

Total nuclear WW3 in 1980's.
Literally the only way barring Yellowstone erupting or aliens invading. Just have South America escape most of the carnage and have the irradiated US have all sorts of civil warfare for decades. All the useful Americans who survived flee to Latin America and boost their economies.
 
West Virginia does indeed have many issues, but using HDI as a measure, it's only slightly behind the entire nation of Italy (and ahead of Southern Italy for that matter).
...

That would be current. The writer, and myself were speaking from the perspective of the late 1980s. The witer at least was also refering to how W Va had a high portion of outside businesses removing their profits from the states economy. A feature often associated with unevenly developed 3dW nations.
 
An HDI of .650 or below.
. Just saying.. But Russia isn't third world.. Mississippi, maldova.. And like some other places in like Rwanda.. Those are third world..

The world is a big place..

But the USA is big.. To make the USA THIRD World Would require a pod pre ARW
 
. Just saying.. But Russia isn't third world.. Mississippi, maldova.. And like some other places in like Rwanda.. Those are third world..

The world is a big place..

But the USA is big.. To make the USA THIRD World Would require a pod pre ARW

Mississippi is in no way comparable to Moldova or Rwanda.
 
. Just saying.. But Russia isn't third world.. Mississippi, maldova.. And like some other places in like Rwanda.. Those are third world..
Mississippi is not third world, unless you count Poland as third world. I won't deny there's very awful parts of both places which if you went to you might think you were in the third world, but objectively by the statistics available, it isn't as bad as countries which by the same measures actually are "third world" like Haiti or Congo-Kinshasa. And as I said, even the poorest counties in Mississippi in the Delta are still better (by these statistics) than an actual Third World country.

The closest the US comes to Third World is certain neighborhoods of inner cities and certain Indian reservations (but even there, I'm curious as to how low they score). It could easily be that these conditions expand to more locations, but the majority of the country will still have a high HDI with any post-1945 PoD which doesn't involve total nuclear war. Having the US have an HDI below 0.8 is the best you'd get.

I've been to Mississippi .. its not that far off from moldova in a lot of places

You're still wrong statistically, and the report I read includes the African American community which is historically deprived even by the standards of Mississippi. Even that community in the poorest counties still seems to have an HDI which is very solid by world standards, albeit among the lowest in the US.
 
Mississippi is not third world, unless you count Poland as third world. I won't deny there's very awful parts of both places which if you went to you might think you were in the third world, but objectively by the statistics available, it isn't as bad as countries which by the same measures actually are "third world" like Haiti or Congo-Kinshasa. And as I said, even the poorest counties in Mississippi in the Delta are still better (by these statistics) than an actual Third World country.

The closest the US comes to Third World is certain neighborhoods of inner cities and certain Indian reservations (but even there, I'm curious as to how low they score). It could easily be that these conditions expand to more locations, but the majority of the country will still have a high HDI with any post-1945 PoD which doesn't involve total nuclear war. Having the US have an HDI below 0.8 is the best you'd get.



You're still wrong statistically, and the report I read includes the African American community which is historically deprived even by the standards of Mississippi. Even that community in the poorest counties still seems to have an HDI which is very solid by world standards, albeit among the lowest in the US.
I also lived most of my life in Detroit .. so yes. there is third world in America, but im also being facetious .. but I agree with everyone in to have the USA be third world .. you would need a POD probably in the 1880's at the latest and even then you would need to really screw the USA from a government perspective, a corporate / financial and from a health care stand point.

just a very big nation. again starting early you could screw a lot of the infrastructure build outs. etc.. but its still going to be tough.. so 2 Yellowstone style events plus new madrid and a full on slip of the san Andreas combined with a few volcanos on the west cost going boom during a full on civil war that would make Yugoslavia proud
 
I also lived most of my life in Detroit .. so yes. there is third world in America, but im also being facetious .. but I agree with everyone in to have the USA be third world .. you would need a POD probably in the 1880's at the latest and even then you would need to really screw the USA from a government perspective, a corporate / financial and from a health care stand point.

Even then I'm skeptical. The 1880s in the US is a fantastic example of capitalism. At worst, the US at this point might end up like Argentina or Chile (nice examples of capitalism gone wrong), which are still far better than actual "Third World" nations.

just a very big nation. again starting early you could screw a lot of the infrastructure build outs. etc.. but its still going to be tough.. so 2 Yellowstone style events plus new madrid and a full on slip of the san Andreas combined with a few volcanos on the west cost going boom during a full on civil war that would make Yugoslavia proud

Infrastructure? People were pretty hardcore about getting a railroad through their town, as violence in the West shows. And all those silver and gold strikes needed infrastructure which the mining companies loved.

And that's a geological issue, not a realistic potential. Yellowstone erupting makes any other eruption or earthquake no worse than someone accidently crashing tbeir car into their house--it's the end of the US, and probably the end of the world too since the climate affects and collapse of the US will cause famine and utter destruction everywhere. Hell, even New Madrid alone isn't too much worse than a severe tornado outbreak (this is the Midwest/Upper South after all) combined with flooding where the worst EF4-5 tornadoes hit the right places.
 
Even then I'm skeptical. The 1880s in the US is a fantastic example of capitalism. At worst, the US at this point might end up like Argentina or Chile (nice examples of capitalism gone wrong), which are still far better than actual "Third World" nations.



Infrastructure? People were pretty hardcore about getting a railroad through their town, as violence in the West shows. And all those silver and gold strikes needed infrastructure which the mining companies loved.

And that's a geological issue, not a realistic potential. Yellowstone erupting makes any other eruption or earthquake no worse than someone accidently crashing tbeir car into their house--it's the end of the US, and probably the end of the world too since the climate affects and collapse of the US will cause famine and utter destruction everywhere. Hell, even New Madrid alone isn't too much worse than a severe tornado outbreak (this is the Midwest/Upper South after all) combined with flooding where the worst EF4-5 tornadoes hit the right places.

Yellowstone would suck very much.. but its not the end of the world.. most likely it is very bad for the USA for quite sometime .. but even at that .. I still don't see it as the end of the USA.

now I was thinking .. you could have a major san Andreas slip .. say one year .. then new madrid.. then say a couple severe hurricanes.. then Yellowstone .. ( note that each successive eruption of Yellowstone is weaker as the hotspot moves. )

just to hose the USA that bad you need something severe or utter incompetence at each level of the government.

too me its like trying to screw Canada, how?! its not gonna happen short of something very bad.

Nations like Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and most of eastern Europe suffered catastrophic levels of barbarism, yet are not third world.
 
Top