Originally posted by: Gauri_3
Trying to recap all that got posted here and how it's relevant to the topic.
Along with basic necessities the issues such as healthcare, education, per capita income, social welfare, the state of infrastructure and public amnities do act as indicators of how developed a country is. The more developed a country is, the better is the state of all mentioned above.
According to the annual survey by the Berlin-based organization Transparency International, Finland, Denmark, and New Zealand are perceived to be the world's least corrupt countries ( Sweden, Singapore, Iceland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Norway completing the top ten), and Somalia and Myanmar are perceived to be the most corrupt. The remaining 8 were Iraq, Haiti, Uzbekistan, Tonga, Sudan, Chad, Afghanistan and Laos, in that order.
Corruption acts as a barrier to development. Lack of funds is a problem faced by many developing nations but I feel that bigger problem is skimming the funds earmarked for developmental projects...be it in the field of healthcare, education or improving the state of public amneties. If the funds reach where they are supposed to, the country's status will eventually lift up. Now, some claim corruption is there in the developing countries also. Agreed, but the key is to see how prevalent it is in a developed country than a developing nation and how critically it affects the general public at the end of the day.
Along with corruption, the general mind set of common public also creates the differences we see among developed vs. developing countries. It is more common to see utter disrespect of public property in developing countries than the developed countries. I am not saying that developed countries do not have any abuse at all....but compared to the developing countries, that abuse is relatively less.