Ethnically speaking do Austrians resemble more Slovaks or the eastern French?

[Oliver109]

East-Central Europe isn't considered part of the first world, huh? Find me a single reputable source that categorizes those countries under the 'third world' label by modern definition, which is based more on development than on Cold War divisions? Based on that division, those countries would obviously be a part of the second world. However, this context became obsolete quite some time ago anyway.

First world is basically countries with high living standards and where the populations are satisfied to stay in their country unless it is to seek professional occupations in other countries, infrastructure and housing and welfare are all adequate and people have money to travel abroard for leisure so this would be countries like Norway, France, Spain, USA,UAE, Italy, possibly Hong Kong and Taiwan. Second world would be countries with decent infrastructure, life expectancy and housing but issues with low pay, unemployment and poor welfare systems so Algeria, Thailand, Russia, Romania, Argentina, China, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Mongolia while third world would be overwhelmingly visible poverty, bad infrastructure, severe corruption and low life expectancy so Phillipines, Cambodia, basically most of Africa including i would say Morocco and Egypt.

[Aldaris]

First world is basically countries with high living standards and where the populations are satisfied to stay in their country unless it is to seek professional occupations in other countries, infrastructure and housing and welfare are all adequate and people have money to travel abroard for leisure so this would be countries like Norway, France, Spain, USA,UAE, Italy, possibly Hong Kong and Taiwan. Second world would be countries with decent infrastructure, life expectancy and housing but issues with low pay, unemployment and poor welfare systems so Algeria, Thailand, Russia, Romania, Argentina, China, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Mongolia while third world would be overwhelmingly visible poverty, bad infrastructure, severe corruption and low life expectancy so Phillipines, Cambodia, basically most of Africa including i would say Morocco and Egypt.

Your attempt to categorize countries into first, second, and third world relies on arbitrary definitions that lack credibility. Where did you take those definitions from? You literally just made them up. Additionally, while these terms are meant to reflect a country's socioeconomic status in some way, surprise, surprise, we already have numerous lists and established metrics available regarding every single socioeconomic aspect there is. So before you propose that East-Central European countries are 'almost the third world,' I might suggest checking them up first.

[Oliver109]

Your attempt to categorize countries into first, second, and third world relies on arbitrary definitions that lack credibility. Where did you take those definitions from? You literally just made them up. Additionally, while these terms are meant to reflect a country's socioeconomic status in some way, surprise, surprise, we already have numerous lists and established metrics available regarding every single socioeconomic aspect there is. So before you propose that East-Central European countries are 'almost the third world,' I might suggest checking them up first.

I am looking at data when making these comments, i am looking at migration patterns and i am saying that people from poorer countries will naturally migrate to richer ones, if you look at migration habits in Europe you will see that people from countries like Hungary, Slovakia and Romania are far more likely to migrate than people from Spain, France, Germany because the salaries are lower, they are therefore not on par with classic first world countries like Germany or Denmark.

[Aldaris]

I am looking at data when making these comments, i am looking at migration patterns and i am saying that people from poorer countries will naturally migrate to richer ones, if you look at migration habits in Europe you will see that people from countries like Hungary, Slovakia and Romania are far more likely to migrate than people from Spain, France, Germany because the salaries are lower, they are therefore not on par with classic first world countries like Germany or Denmark.

Nobody has ever disputed that people from poorer countries tend to migrate to richer ones rather than vice-versa, even though it's not a one-hundred percent rule. Therefore, I'm not disputing this is the case in Europe as well. Show me where I denied immigration happening or said that countries like Hungary, Slovakia, or Romania are completely on par with any other first-world country. Good luck. Not being on par with Germany or Denmark doesn't disqualify you from being a first world country, let alone categorize you as 'almost third world'. There are socioeconomic differences within the categories as well, not only between them. Shocking, I know.

[Oliver109]

Nobody has ever disputed that people from poorer countries tend to migrate to richer ones rather than vice-versa, even though it's not a one-hundred percent rule. Therefore, I'm not disputing this is the case in Europe as well. Show me where I denied immigration happening or said that countries like Hungary, Slovakia, or Romania are completely on par with any other first-world country. Good luck. Not being on par with Germany or Denmark doesn't disqualify you from being a first world country, let alone categorize you as 'almost third world'. There are socioeconomic differences within the categories as well, not only between them. Shocking, I know.

So where do you draw the line between first world and second world?

[Aldaris]

So where do you draw the line between first world and second world?

I don't believe such a line could be drawn. There would be core countries, fringe countries, and everything in between, rendering the terms almost meaningless. Plus, classifications would vary depending on the source, resulting in multiple categorizations for individual countries on the fringe. No matter what, dividing the world into two categories based on some socioeconomical criteria isn't a consistent idea. Just another case of Sorites paradox - rather than trying to find some precise definition with fixed numbers, sometimes the best you can do is 'I know it when I see it' approach.

[Tooting Carmen]

Well the conditions can hardly be first world there if people are willing to upsticks to work in messy kitchens and dirty construction sites en masse, if conditions were that civilised there they would stay. It is like how you don't see Brits going to Australia or Sweden in their millions to work there because this country is still a more civilised and comfortable country to live in than pretty much anywhere else.

LOL one million British-born people live in Australia. Plus thousands more in NZ, Canada, US, Southern Africa, Arabia, SE Asia, Mediterranean Europe...

[Anatolya]

Slovaks propbably look too Slavic for Austrians, Eastern French (like Alsatians) on the other hand have some significant Germanic influence due to geographical reasons so i'd go for Eastern French

[Scarface F]

Amusing how some western Europeans glorify their high crime sinking shitholes with bleak future. I would rather try to clean up own mess.

[Scarface F]

Slovaks propbably look too Slavic for Austrians, Eastern French (like Alsatians) on the other hand have some significant Germanic influence due to geographical reasons so i'd go for Eastern French

Native Alsatians are Germans who have been Frenchified. It's a sad story.