First, HN consistently misuses the term "third world". In 2024, this term is now very out of date to describe developing economies (and below). Also, the original meaning was not at all what most people think -- it was about Soviet vs US alignment. And, no, South Africa was definitely middle income when he grew up there -- and it still is (sadly). For a long time (maybe still true?), the GDP per capita in SA nearly the highest amoung all African countries. (I think Seychelles is the richest African country now.)

"Third world" was a geopolitical term but now it's economic and cultural.

I assure you South Africa is third world by any measure. The GDP of SA (a large country with tons of resources and a population of 60m) is roughly on par with that of the Toronto metro area (population 7m) or the Phoenix metro (population 5m). It's middle income... and it probably will ~always be.

None of this really matters though - what Musk has done in the US (like it - or him - or not) was only possible in the US.

GDP is a kind of screwed up measure because the buying power of the dollar in the US is so much worse than most other countries. Case in point you can find a little san jose neighborhood where the gdp is an order of magnitude higher than a little mexico city neighborhood with more or less the exact same sorts of homes on the same sort of street. Now you might argue the sj homes are that much more valuable because of what they offer beyond the home via location proximity to opportunities, but its not like everyone benefits from such things or even that these opportunities are equally available to everyone. Yet everyone shoulders the costs of others success and position.

Depends on what. Tech is cheap:

https://iphone-worldwide.com/

From my experience travelling, the best measure I have seen with my own eyes a blend of GDP-per-capita and PPP-per-capita. I say "blend" because some places have incredibly cheap labour, which makes PPP-per-capita artificially high. Unfortunately, you see more depression, obvious, poverty in those places.

About your example of living in San Jose, California, USA vs Mexico City: Where would you prefer to live? Where do you think the schools, hospitals, economy, and social safety net (retirement, etc) is better? Sure, the houses may look similar, but San Jose is objectively rich by global standards and Mexico City is middle income.

Honestly it might be not so different in mexico city. There are probably some decent enough schools, I wouldn’t be surprised if a good private school is a lot cheaper. Medical is probably the same for all intents and purposes but I expect your out of pocket to be way cheaper. Plenty of californians go to mexico for costly dental or medical work already. And lastly for retirement I am sure your savings will go much further in mexico city than in san jose. There are many californians who send money to family in mexico because the quality of life is better for them to stay there and stretch that dollar then for the entire family to all move north. You might be talking an upper middle class lifestyle there vs a desperate one.

It's really hard to take people who use the term "third world" this way seriously. There are more precise ways to clarify your opinion without resorting to meaningless pejoratives.

OK well I’m from there. When I moved to the first world, my eyes were opened. They literally are worlds apart culturally and economically.

The term “third world” is a good and very descriptive one.

I'm not denying that these are worlds apart—it's simply not a materially-meaningful term.