You seem to misunderstand the point
!st and #rd world refer to the societies development both technologically and socially.

If you think there is no third world I suggest you travel to Calcutta or Honduras or similar places like Somalia, and experience it yourself.

@Davesnothere The point is there are rich countries and poor countries.and those inbetween. Why should that be ? Being poor is not being backward.

@VAL3941 No, that is not the point I was making.
In the First world, you can be both fat and poor.
You can afford to be concerned about the plight of the Third world.
In the Third world, your thinking about Dinner.
Can you get Dinner?
Will you?

Thus the third world can and does exist inside and alongside the first world, but the base privalage of those in the first world often blinds them to it.

Why should it be?
Who ever told you there was a way things are "supposed" to be?
There is the way they are, and what we might make of them.

As long as you have people on the globe who think it is ok to own more than we need (most of us here in the first world do even if we are poor)
There will be want in the third world.

Right now for instance America is pissed off that all the good, middle income jobs disappeared. Went to China, and where? THE THIRD WORLD, turning a lot of it into the second world, but also dragging the USA down into that second world too.

Why do you expect that the entire world would be as altruistic as you?
It would be nice if it were so, but since it is not so, why be angry and upset it is not?
How does that help anything?

Would it not be more productive and less angry a view to just accept there are assholes inthe world, that you are obviously not one of them, and do your level best on the personal level to counteract as many as you can?

@Davesnothere OK so then we agree not tovagree ?

@VAL3941 It is not agreement or disagreement
What you take "Third World" to mean seems to be , in your words "Backward"
Which you seem to paint onto everything, society, tradition, culture, industry, and wealth.
But the term does not mean that.

It refers to "developing countries"
That is nation which do not have the technological and industrial development of the western world.

The lack of this critical infrastructure enables or prevents the nations in question from developing Industry and Technology and leaves them poor and impoverished.

Since the Corporate Globalization movement of the 80's you now have places where these two types of societies exist next to one another, instead of on seperate contininets.

@Davesnothere
So we then "DO " agree to disagree ?

@VAL3941 Only if you insist of seeing the term "third World" as some kind of indication of a negative social and cultural state, rather than a sheer indicator of technological development.

To me, the way your using the term, as an indicator of "less than", is bigoted. It assumes that since some culture is less technically developed somehow the people are less, not as "developed.
Which is ignorant and bigoted.
Your average bushman can Id 30,000 species of plants and animals and knows how to use them, of neccessity, can navigate by stars, can track all sorts of wildlife.
Most "developed" folks die in the woods from shame.

@Davesnothere
so I am bigoted, but we still agreebto disagree ?

@VAL3941 I am not saying you are bigoted
I am saying the way your using that term has bigoted connotations
Is that your intention, for the term "third world" to carry bigoted connotations?