Why are some countries richer than the others?! This interesting question interests simple people and also famous scientists for many years.

Countries compete for several years. Sometime, it’s no matter in which area they compete. Their aim is to win, be the first at the “ladder of the best countries.” For several years countries are compete and compare each other in every area of their existence. People also compare their-self with everyone around them. It’s in us, in everyone. It’s in our nature.

For a several centuries, some thousand of years people, nations and countries are divided each other into innumerable number of groups. They are divided in spite of their economy, culture, language, religion, number of citizens and more and more other.
Sometimes we compare something which is incomparable. When we are comparing different states or nations, it’s seen that some are stronger, richer or has more positives than it really has. Be careful, and don’t forget their historical background, their culture...


Rand Corp., political scientist Francis Fukuyama argues in his latest book that some societies are able to develop cultural norms, such as hard work and mutual treust, more than other...

Such a positive cultural values foster economic growth, their absence retards it. Cultural values are like appropriate economic policies, they are necessary, thought not always sufficient, for economic growth to occur. Adam Smith, another scientist who interests in this question assert that wealth is produced most rapidly when the economic role of government is limited is probably the most influential and durable argument ever made by an economist. Many contemporary economists, including some with Nobel prizes, have further explored the roots of economic growth. But the others argues that while the efforts of these economists have been fruitful, most since Smith have ignored a crucial variable, that of culture.

We must not forget about the importance of cultural factors in economic growth. We have to concentrate on the specific factor of trust> expectation...of regular, honest, and cooperative behavior, based on commonly shared norms. Social capital, which is ability of people to work together for common purposes. It is something what many countries do not have.


Trust and other cultural virtues can be destroyed more easily than created. Large centralized governments destroy those intermediate institutions between the family and the state and hence destroy trust.

The French Revolution and Napoleon’s dictatorship destroyed many institutions. Hence France’s poor performance in industry and technological innovation relative to other societies in which such institutions survived.

Another important factor is personal gains. Trade-based economic model is based on maximization or prosperity, division of labor and exploitation of nature and fellow-man. Each person under the system tries to maximize his or her gains at the expense of another person in any trade transaction. The system promotes the maximum inter-dependencies among individuals, families, communities and eventually among nations for even basic needs so as to make them totally dependent on the system itself.
The prosperity of a collectivity, division of labor- knowledge-ownership and depletion of nature are the pillars on which trade-based economic model operates. The collectivity for which prosperity is sought progressively enlarge to cover community, a province, a region, a nation, a continent, a racial group, a culture, a religious or cultural group or their alliances, a whole empire, whole globe.


Another fact is that nations providing goods and services procure wealth from other nations providing merely labor markets merely spend its wealth and transfer to its trading partner. Thus, global trade order globalizes the classes and has notes. It produced first-world, middle word and third world.

Nations who are politically strong and who have mastered the trade other can export its lower-classes and has not conditions to the weaker nations while strengthening its prosperity by wealth transfer from all over the world. Globalization of this theory is allowed by globalization of trade which makes rich nations richer and poor nations poorer. Rich nations entice the poor nations with novelty of consumerism and increased standard of living to give up their economic sovereignty and join global trade regime but international consumerism only deplete even whatever wealth such poor nations have managed to have.

When consumerism is confined within a nation, there is wealth transfer among people but nations as a whole does not loose wealth. So, consumerism, imported life styles and employments can not be considered sign of national progress. It’s a sign of degeneration and eventual fall of nation.

Trade is such an expansionist thing, that it constantly expands its domain. It commercialized every aspect of human life, human relationship, human values, and human needs. It also depletes nature, commercializes nature, privatizes nature, and destroys nature. Land, water, air and some of the natural gifts that man absolutely can not live without become commercialized. A free - trade where nothing is free and everything has a cost and price. It established supremacy of capitalism over humanity, nations, nature and even culture. Cultural products and political ideas become goods and services and they are subjected to free-trade. Thus cultural invasion, political invasion become inseparable from free-trade. Films, movies, TV, magazines, books, and newspapers reflect only commercial ventures but also they are also part and parcel of cultural and cultural and political values too.

Why are some countries, nations richer than the other? I tried to analyze this question and I think I find some interesting and real factors which influence at the nation’s wealth. There are plenty of influences, but these are one of the most visible ones. But what is also very important, we could never answer this question clearly and precisely because every time we find new reasons, new answers.