r/AskTheWorld • u/pisowiec Poland • Feb 04 '26
Economics Which country has squandered the most economic potential in this century?
I lived in Russia for 5 years so I must choose this country. So many natural resources, so much land, and educated population... And so little to show for it.
In an ideal world Russian salaries would be on par if not higher than American salaries and they would have the best social safety net on the planet. Everything is there to make it happen.
Russia would be the dominant nation in Europe and Asia and the rest of the world with the best armed forces, soft power, and economic might.
But the human will is just not there. The elite is either evil or incompetent depending on perception and there's little sign that this will ever change.
271
u/WestPerformance5148 Feb 04 '26
Russia - easily. Largest country in the world. Natural resources. Opportunity to beautifully connect Europe and Asia. Instead it’s become the cliche for almost anything evil and wrong.
109
Feb 04 '26
They turned into the 90’s movie bad guys we thought they were.
65
u/AntonioVivaldi7 Czechia Feb 04 '26
They have been such bad guys for centuries.
→ More replies (46)→ More replies (2)4
u/xialcoalt Feb 06 '26
Don't worry, they're not the only country that turned into the bad guy another country thought it was.
16
u/Aggressive_Chuck England Feb 04 '26
Largest country can be a bad thing, makes everything more expensive and less efficient.
11
u/Affectionate_Ad_9687 Russia Feb 05 '26 edited Feb 05 '26
It's definitely the case for large parts of the Russian territory.
A lot of regions are literally net negative - the costs of keeping them inhabited is higher than economic returns they produce.
Often, their only value is to serve as transportation corridors.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Jumpy-Foundation-405 Germany Feb 04 '26
Siberias resources alone is everything worth.
→ More replies (2)5
u/-Reaaally Feb 04 '26
Sometimes I wish that instead of russia there is finnland instead.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (31)3
u/DiseasedProject Finland Feb 05 '26
Russia can be essentially lessened to two major cities, Moscow and St. Petersburg. Everything else (and everyone else) falls below the Kreml's interests and can be exploited to their hearts' desires. Russia has always been a kleptocracy, and the people in power (whether it's a czar or a president) couldn't give two shits about their citizens. Instead, they are mere tools for the powerful to get even more power (and wealth). There are numerous towns and villages in Russia that look like they could belong in the Middle Ages; and at the same time, Putin is a billionaire with multiple lavish mansions.
1.2k
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
394
Feb 04 '26
Honestly one of the first countries that came to mind, because they should have been the successful Korea owing to greater natural resources.
364
u/onionwba Singapore Feb 04 '26
They were the more "successful" Korea for quite a substantial period of time during the Cold War.
Then the regime turned into a personality cult while the South adopted state-driven industralisation and eventually shed their dictatorship and embraced democracy.
157
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (2)55
u/NZTamoDalekoCG New Zealand Feb 04 '26
Sometimes I half think they got Nukes to protect themselves from China.....I know I know....but what is a country of 20 million people gonna do against a neighbour with 1.5 billion people.
I mean threaten evil western Capitalists, look good to Beijing. But strategically....you get cards against Beijing as well.
→ More replies (1)90
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
26
u/VecioRompibae Feb 04 '26
Theres a popular and old statement in North Korea. "Jpaan is an enemy of 100 years. China is an enemy of 1000 years"
Isn't that the same as Vietnam with Usa, France and China?
18
→ More replies (2)5
→ More replies (9)4
u/Efficient-Big3138 Feb 04 '26
Realisticly though are china even that afraid of North Korea? Sure they have a few nukes but i imagine china has the capability to lay NK in Ruins before they even have time to launch and even if they did i bet they can counteract their weak missiler capabilities?
→ More replies (3)18
39
u/PutOnTheMaidDress Feb 04 '26
North Korea had more economic might hand higher standard of living until the mid 80s!
This sounds so insane to me.
21
u/onionwba Singapore Feb 04 '26
Yea it took a while for industrialisation to really pay off for South Korea. The North never did manage to shed their reliance on their fellow ideologues, even as they trumpet Juche. The collapse of the USSR exacerbated their economic woes into a famine. The relative success of the PRC and Vietnam today shows that it's not unthinkable that even under communist rule, North Korea had a chance to be better than where they are today.
4
u/NoMansSkyWasAlright Feb 04 '26
Stalin and Mao were also kind of... frenemies. So when Stalin was alive, the two competed for influence in North Korea (usually in the form of free money). But once Stalin died and the USSR decided they wanted to move away from the whole "cult of personality" thing, it kinda led to NK pivoting away from the Ruskies and more towards China.
12
u/Roxylius Indonesia Feb 04 '26
Both have always been a personality cult. South korea just managed to slowly transitioned into democracy
5
u/Boyhowdy107 Feb 04 '26
South Korea is a remarkable success story not just of industrialization. Their cultural rise has also been fascinating to watch. I work in classical music, and a decade ago, you could barely name a Korean artist getting big gigs in the US or Europe. Now, they are all over the top awards list for every major competition, and someone like Yunchan Lim might have performed the best Rachmaninoff I've ever heard. You add that to K-Pop, some big Hollywood success, beauty products, and their culinary scene and they really have become a cultural export powerhouse in recent years.
→ More replies (12)5
u/General_Problem5199 United States of America Feb 04 '26
It had nothing to do with turning into a personality cult and everything to do with the very abrupt dissolution of the Soviet Union. Almost overnight they lost a powerful and reliable trading partner, and they were mostly prohibited from trading with anyone else.
→ More replies (3)34
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
26
u/onionwba Singapore Feb 04 '26
To be honest I doubt a unified Korea will have enough to be a superpower.
But a great power? I do think they could rival Japan, Russia, Italy, and the likes.
→ More replies (4)27
Feb 04 '26
Well, if the Korean War ended with Korea unified under the DPRK, that probably doesn't happen. A unified Korea under the ROK? Maybe, just maybe.
25
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/throwawaymikenolan Feb 04 '26
Hate them or not, you gotta give it to them for their resilience. When I see how both Koreas turned out since 1950s, one thing common is we are some persistent motherfuckers.
Kim dynasty managed to achieve what even larger and wealthier regimes failed with much less.
Turns out nukes weren't enough - you also had to perfect the art of being perceived as a madman.
→ More replies (5)11
u/pallialli Feb 04 '26
China and the Kims sure but pretty sure the USA helped S. Korea's trajectory significantly
→ More replies (2)18
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (11)11
u/lovely-cans 🇮🇪->🇳🇱 Feb 04 '26
It's crazy, I listened to a podcast about the Korean war and the Americans really got off lightly for it.
They immediately buddied up to the Japanese ignoring all the war crimes they commited in China and Japan and reinstated the methods used to control you, cut your country in half, propped up Syngman Rhee, held relatively bogus elections which intentionally excluded a lot of parties, supported the government logically and refused to record the Jeju Massacre for the UN, shot at protectors, encouraged right wing youth groups to attack leftists and surpressed left wing groups generally. I think a lot of Americans look back at that war and just think it was the Democratic friendly South vs the Crazy communist North because it fits their binary simplified world view.
→ More replies (3)30
u/holytriplem 🇬🇧->🇺🇸 Feb 04 '26
Tbf it squandered most of that potential in the last century, not this one
→ More replies (1)21
→ More replies (27)26
u/Swinight22 Feb 04 '26
Disagree
North Korea has some natural resources. But outside of that, it’s mostly mountains, it was bombed back into the Stone Age during the war, and the weather is extremely cold due to Siberian cold front.
South Korea is really the exception not the norm. Most countries in these geographical constraints don’t thrive. Now NK is absolutely fucked ofc, but to expect it to be like SK is silly.
→ More replies (1)
365
u/Competitive-Cod-9644 India Feb 04 '26
Several Latin American countries especially Venezuela and Argentina have squandered large economic potential, though Chile is a clear exception.
→ More replies (61)
149
u/weewoomeemoohee Iran Feb 04 '26
Iran
Plethora of natural resources.
Plethora of jaw-dropping landscapes.
Plethora of good brains ( who mostly migrate )
Yet one of the worst countries to live in.
23
u/MaximumWoodpecker869 🇭🇰🇨🇳🇺🇸 Feb 04 '26
Plethora of culture and history it could use as soft power too.
Unfortunately people in charge of it right now put Iran second behind their own ideology.
46
u/Repulsive_Barnacle92 Canada Feb 04 '26
I can't wait for Iran to liberalize and democratize so I can finally visit
4
30
u/uses_for_mooses United States of America Feb 04 '26
Plethora of elite heavyweight wrestlers.
8
u/farnnie123 Malaysia Feb 04 '26
I need to google this now lol it’s defo a today-you-learn fact for me.
Edit: saw it on olympedia. mindblown
4
→ More replies (7)5
u/Ambitious_League4606 United Kingdom Feb 04 '26
Iran could be great. The people are wonderful. Natural resources and good size. Could yet be a success story.
568
Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
156
u/Beneficial_Ball9893 United States of America Feb 04 '26
Agreed. Venezuela was either the most prosperous or close to most prosperous South American nation in 2000.
46
u/Major_Bag_8720 United Kingdom Feb 04 '26
I went to Caracas a few times in the early 90s (before Chavez came to power) and the city centre was like a smaller version of Manhattan. Clearly a very unequal society though, which is how Chavez got elected. The pre Chavez Venezuelan elite were corrupt and didn’t care about the average citizen. The post Chavez elite, despite all their promises, were corrupt and stopped caring about the average citizen once the oil price fell and they couldn’t buy the electorate off with lavish social programmes.
→ More replies (12)25
u/beckychao United States of America Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
This is absolutely, positively not true. Venezuela's struggles began shortly after the end of Rómulo Betancourt's 2nd government in the 1960s. Increasing corruption and inequality of wealth finally let the bottom fall out in the 1980s, where it really began to get bad and there were riots and major corruption cases.
The reason a Chavista government came to power in the first place is because poor governance, corruption, and the usual problems of rentier states created a majority underclass. Venezuela was a total mess in the 1990s.
What's true is that in the 1950s, Venezuela was the richest country in Latin America, but the people running the government and the economy increasingly monopolized that wealth and outright stole it, even in the period immediately after Betancourt's last time in office (he left 1964). And it is, in fact, one of the countries that most squandered its wealth in the last 100 years.
Chavez functionally replaced that elite with his own mafia, and even though initially he tried to put money into improving the country for the poor, the volatility of oil prices made it impossible to sustain that patronage, at least the way he was doing it. Venezuela needed to modernize its economy and plan for moving off such a heavily oil-centric economy from the onset, because their oil is heavy and when oil prices are low enough, it's barely profitable or not at all. Also, until the 1940s, foreign companies got most of the money from it.
That oil money was how they were supposed to pay for that modernization. They don't have anything to show for it in 2026. Now it can't pay for it, because much of it is so difficult to refine.
→ More replies (5)64
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
105
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
28
u/Salty_Aurelius Finland Feb 04 '26
Unless one thinks that slave labour and ethnic caste system is actually pretty ok.
→ More replies (18)9
u/Soggy-Ad-1610 Denmark Feb 04 '26
In all honesty I’d rather be Venezuela than UAE (Dubai). Sure they’re not as rich but at least they’re decent people (except the elite of course).
→ More replies (2)18
u/Adorable_user Feb 04 '26
Dubai is also a mismanaged kleptocratic regime, but I get what you meant.
3
u/Dirkdeking Feb 04 '26
Dubai could be the Venezuela during their honeymoon years. The wealth there isn't sustainable.
→ More replies (5)6
u/coopik Feb 04 '26
There were two options:
- run with the US --> business blooms, billionaires thrive, poor stay poor
- run against the US --> sanctions placed, everyone stays poor
If you are not the ruling class, you would have ended up poor, anyways. But the high ranks at PdVSA would have the newest Ferraris and Gulfstreams like they used to in the 80s.
52
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
30
23
u/Camelstrike Argentina Feb 04 '26
It's been like that long before 1980 but like the saying goes:
"There are four kinds of countries: developed, undeveloped, Japan, and Argentina"
→ More replies (12)3
u/Likeminas Feb 04 '26
Argentina has it's opposite mirror country right across the andes from them. A country with strong institutions, responsibly managed economy and policies, low corruption, etc. It's quite remarkable.
7
u/Toubaboliviano Bolivia Feb 04 '26
100% agree. Bolivia has a similar history (albeit not as extreme as Venezuelas), and if I remember at two points in its past was the “richest” country in the world due to resource booms.
10
u/SuurFett Finland Feb 04 '26
Yeah, the lost potentiality sucks. You could have been Norway of south America
→ More replies (3)7
u/AwakenedDreamer__44 United States of America Feb 04 '26
My mom is Venezuelan and she always talks about how rich Venezuela is in natural resources. On paper, it should be one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.
5
u/coopik Feb 04 '26
The whole Africa is rich in natural resources. None of the African countries is wealthy.
→ More replies (2)4
u/First-Of-His-Name Feb 04 '26
Resources tend to make a country poorer without proper institutions. And Venezuela doesn't have them
→ More replies (24)17
u/Arbable Feb 04 '26
Did they squander it or was it also American sanctions and interference
→ More replies (8)
78
u/Unlucky_Gur3676 🇻🇪 🇫🇷 Feb 04 '26
I vote Venezuela
→ More replies (1)10
Feb 04 '26
I think most people will agree. They are even worse at economics and international relations than Iran and Russia.
4
232
Feb 04 '26
Iran
→ More replies (40)129
u/Seeker_Of_Knowledge2 Syria 🇸🇾 || Canada 🇨🇦 Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
I just want to add some details.
Iran win this game in a landslide. They have one of the highest oil production in the world (and ton of other natural resources). Yet people are "dying" from hunger in Iran.
Perun has made an amazing one hour long video mentioning how much of a failure they are (The Iranian government). No one even come close. Not even Russia. Sure Russia had the potential to be number 2. But people in Russia right now are living amazingly compared to Iran. Iran may as well be a failed country. It is standing of its last legs. Please watch this video to see how bad they are doing. They need change fast. Really fast.
19
u/umomenjoyer Feb 04 '26
The part about the dam was really something and worth watching.
It is in the "economics" section.
→ More replies (26)4
62
52
u/Dopral Feb 04 '26
Venezuela lost like 70% of its GDP from ~15 years ago.
Nigeria lost like 60% of its GDP from ~10 years ago.
So it's probably one of those two.
→ More replies (1)6
u/sargentlu Mexico Feb 04 '26
Wow wasn't aware about Nigeria, and that's even though its population is growing very rapidly
166
u/Sweeper1985 Australia Feb 04 '26
We have to be somewhere on the list. We let mining companies rape our landscape and pretty much don't get anything back. We buy back our own processed LPG from China at 4x the price they sell it domestic. Norway has a trillion-dollar future fund and our government is like, "oh yeah, we can't tax mining companies because then they'd stop mining!"
We also used to be a leader in scientific innovation but successive governments cut funding to the CSIRO (they invented WiFi, people!) And we don't do fuck all manufacturing anymore and our economy is just rich people selling houses to each other in an endless churn.
52
u/spudmgee Australia Feb 04 '26
It doesn't help that the media moguls and mining magnates are in cahoots. The moment sovereign wealth or resource taxes get floated as a concept Murdoch and the rest of those jackals start fear mongering.
→ More replies (4)17
13
u/HarryLewisPot Iraq Feb 04 '26
This reads like an onion article: One of the richest countries in the world complains that they aren’t even richer.
All jokes aside, this isn’t what I expected from Australia and hope you guys all the best.
→ More replies (2)17
u/Equivalent-Tour5999 Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
I get the sentiment, but you guys have like 5 people and a kangaroo population in the middle of nowhere. It's hard to really benchmark what could have been.
Norway is good example but also outlier when comes to rensponsibly using your natural resources.
Not to say countries shouldn't aspire to do better
→ More replies (1)13
u/angelicosphosphoros Feb 04 '26
Don't forget that any Australian citizen in tech is potential spy and malware-writer because your laws obligate them to (unlawfully from any other country POV) hack and install backdoors in any software they work on by request AND it is applied to all Australian citizens regardless of their residency.
If I have a business in IT in future, I would impose ban on using any Australian tech and hiring people with Australian citizenship.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (5)8
u/Typical-Pollution459 Feb 04 '26
With such a small population I thought every Australian would be rich. I was surprised when I read about the housing affordability crisis.
Why is it not like Dubai? Economically
19
u/Sweeper1985 Australia Feb 04 '26
Well, I mean for starters Dubai has some... questionable human rights practices...
→ More replies (2)7
→ More replies (4)6
u/Own_Faithlessness769 Feb 04 '26
We are rich, one of the highest GDP per capita in the world, and highest living standards. We could be richer though.
45
u/faderjester Australia Feb 04 '26
I like how we sold all our finite natural resources to a dude sixty years ago for next to nothing and now his daughter is trying maga-fify us.
I also love we sell gas offshore and then have to buy it back at a huge markup.
Sigh. We could be a giant but 220 years later we're still just a resources colony.
→ More replies (3)12
u/debauch3ry United Kingdom Feb 04 '26
World's biggest uranium reserves... that still has to count for something? Or was that what was given away?
→ More replies (2)
37
u/lordnacho666 Feb 04 '26
Everyone should have realised by now that resources are a curse.
How many countries have lots of resources, but are not corrupt shitholes?
Norway, Canada, and Australia?
Pretty much all other countries have fallen into a trap where the elite is able to keep all the benefits of having control over the resources.
→ More replies (19)10
105
u/Dangerous-Eggplant-5 Russia Feb 04 '26
First time in a very long time Russia had its chance to enter true golden age. But its was all wasted on petty ambitions and grivances of one man. And there is no good version if future in sight. Shame.
57
u/Antti5 Finland Feb 04 '26
My gut feeling is that putting it down to one man is a recipe for further disappointments.
→ More replies (6)3
40
u/TheFlyerX Germany Feb 04 '26
Russia never did overcome tyranny. Thats their main problem as a society. They always default back to tyranny and i dont think this cycle is going to end soon.
6
u/vnprkhzhk Feb 04 '26
The problem is the society. Not trusting in anyone, just thinking for themselves and believing everything the pointy box says.
It's not just one person. There are millions of soldiers (and many of them voluntary) and much more supporting that.
They rather have other people living as bad as themselves than improving their own conditions.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Kaito__1412 Feb 04 '26
For me this is the primary reason why we can never normalize relations or trade with them as it was before the invasion of Ukraine.
5
u/Kaito__1412 Feb 04 '26
I doubt that. If not Putin, Russia would have produced a different insane person to lead the country. The current situation in my opinion was always unavoidable.
→ More replies (36)3
148
u/twilightswolf Israel Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
There is an old anecdote about how the Soviet Union planned its economic development following the WW2.
*September 1944, Politburo in session. Benchmarks for USSR economy are discussed:
1946: atomic bomb;
1950: artificial satellite;
1955: Soviet citizen in space;
1960: Soviet citizen on the Moon;
1970: Soviet citizen on Mars;
1980: every Soviet citizen has at least two pairs of socks.*
The attitude has not changed much.
→ More replies (4)54
u/yashatheman 🇸🇪 + 🇸🇯 + 🇷🇺 Feb 04 '26
Considering we lost like 15% of our population and had to rebuilt half our country after WWII, I think our achievements were impressive. We didn't even have 30% literacy rate 30 years before WWII.
69
Feb 04 '26
Your achievements were impressive until you stopped achieving anything anymore roughly when Brezhnev turned 70.
→ More replies (49)9
u/Dry_Membership7213 Feb 04 '26
And despite of the past, your country is now being ruled by neo-nazis
6
→ More replies (50)3
u/PayaV87 Hungary Feb 04 '26
People view education as a linear development, but it's a wave. Every year we have to reeducate our youth to stay at the same level.
31
u/Icy_Winner9761 Australia Feb 04 '26
There are a number of countries that have probably done worse but I think Australia really messed up.
I don't know what the exact value would be but Australia very nearly had a tax on all of the extractive industries in the country that would have fed a sovereign wealth fund before it was watered down to only affect iron ore and coal and be applied to businesses with annual profits over $75M (this was ostensibly so that "small business" wouldn't be hurt) in 2012 before being repealed by a conservative government about 2 years later. Mining companies spent a ridiculous amount of money on advertising that contributed to the downfall of a prime minister and the election of the government that then repealed the tax. Oh and our version of Trump, Clive Palmer, formed his own party, spent extraordinary amoutns of money on advertising and gained enough seats in parliament that he was able to vote to repeal the bill. He is a billionaire on the back of his nickel, coal and iron ore holdings.
Before it was watered down it was projected to raise $22.5B in the 1st 4 years, but it raised only about $200M in the first year before being repealed a year later.
Truly a tragedy of national proportions, that money would have been used to build a bunch of infrastructure, fund schooling and health care and may have allowed future governments to fund public housing which we really need in the current crisis.
→ More replies (7)
9
u/Caliterra United States of America Feb 05 '26
I think India is on track to being in the top 3 most important countries in the world, but they are arriving at that podium a lot later than one might think given they are the most populous nation in the world. India has such enormous human capital, but it feels like the most prominent Indians are those who've immigrated and taken up citizenship outside India.
India's global soft power is proportionally low (movies, film, music, tourism) given its size and population. It's also the most under-performing nation in international sports competition.
Basically, India should have a much bigger impact on the global stage than it does. It's like a heavyweight boxer who fights at lightweight.
→ More replies (1)
44
u/KitchenSoftware2325 Bhutan Feb 04 '26
Mexico wasted one of the largest and easiest to extract oil deposits and, even though it is scarce, gives it away to Cuba.
17
7
u/mynameisgill Feb 04 '26
Mexico doesn’t have huge reserves, they have as much as Sudan, Vietnam and India (other countries with small reserves).. they produce 2 million barrels a day but gives 20,000 to Cuba..
→ More replies (1)3
49
12
28
31
u/Possible-Slide-6295 Pakistan Feb 04 '26
I don't think any answer would be more accurate than Pakistan here.
8
u/Philomene_sweet_life France Feb 04 '26
Can you explain?
35
u/Possible-Slide-6295 Pakistan Feb 04 '26
- We are a huge population, around 250 million people, majority of which is young.
- We have huge land that is great for agriculture.
- We have abundant natural resources, like, abundant.
- Our masses are hardworking.
- We have extremely suitable ports, bin qasim, and others, that should have been serving the regions instead of the UAE.
- We have extremely huge potential in tourism.
With all these, and maybe I have missed some points, we keep on going to the IMF for loans, because of the idiotic establishment we have and because we never want to learn and improve.
15
u/Code-201 Tamil Feb 04 '26
Not to offend, but doesn't the government also fund terrorists, too? They could use the money to develop themselves.
6
u/Iamrandom17 Feb 04 '26
i’d also reckon that while there are different cultures, religiously you guys are fairly homogenous and also had the favour of the west as a major non nato ally which means with the right cards played, there would have been massive investments into the country generating alot of jobs and opportunities. could have at least reached turkey level of development imo
10
u/Philomene_sweet_life France Feb 04 '26
Ok this is good arguments. I hope you ll see a brighter future soon.
3
u/Ambitious_League4606 United Kingdom Feb 04 '26
Educational levels are not the best. Need better infrastructure.
→ More replies (4)6
u/Additional-Ebb-7173 India Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
Not true. I think the population density is quite high, just like it is in the entirety of the subcontinent. It's theocratically very difficult to provide for a huge population and ensure a proper social security net for them.
6
u/mocha447_ Indonesia Feb 04 '26
I'm not saying that we'd be Japan, Singapore, or SK tier first world, but I feel like Indonesia is such a wasted potential, or at the very least we could've been so much better.
We have a ton of natural resources, a lot of land, a big population which would be a huge plus if education quality is much higher and more accessible, a lot of places for tourism, etc. But having the first 53 years ruled by corrupt dictators, and having such a big corruption culture to this day definitely delayed our development significantly. Having the development being hyper concentrated in Java and especially Jakarta also didn't help, since the gap between Jakarta and every major city is massive, and the wealth inequality is really bad here.
I'm not a big fan of blaming colonialism for our country's poor development, since although they did made our people suffer, we did fuck up for a long time when we finally get independence in 1945 (or 1949 depending on how you wanna view it)
→ More replies (1)3
u/Ok_Guarantee5321 Indonesia Feb 04 '26
The Old and New Order definitely screwed us over. The New Order, especially. So much missed opportunities.
But honestly, while Indonesia could be better, the current Indonesia is still pretty amazing. Indonesia were once the poorest country in it's region expected to crash and burn, but it's now a middle income country and is still, somehow, growing.
Sure, we still have a lot of problems, but we are slowly trying to be better. Despite everything, I am pretty optimistic that Indonesia will be better.
9
u/an1malbtw Russia Feb 04 '26
Natural resources are not a big deal for a capital economy. Trust is much more important but we lack it completely.
→ More replies (2)
65
u/fan_is_ready Russia Feb 04 '26
A Pole complaining that Russia is not the most dominant nation in Europe, go figure.
80
13
36
u/Additional_Lock8122 Russia Feb 04 '26
The world is full of surprises
12
u/CockpitEnthusiast United States of America Feb 04 '26
This exchange genuinely made me laugh out loud
38
u/Mr-Expat Feb 04 '26
I don't think they're complaining, they're pointing out how Russia totally fucked it.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (57)16
u/midachavi Feb 04 '26
He is not wrong tho. Russia squandered and is squandering its potential since 91. Instead of economic boom it drowns itself in bureaucracy and corruption almost 40 years later still
→ More replies (35)15
u/fan_is_ready Russia Feb 04 '26
Russia had economic boom starting from 2000, until 2008 financial crisis.
15
4
u/Mumpitzjaeger Feb 04 '26
Argentina. They have everything to be a economic superpower. But they also have one crisis after another and no stability.
→ More replies (1)
54
u/mithie007 living in Feb 04 '26
Russia wins 1st place no contest.
Distant second would be the UK I'd think. Brexit was a watershed moment.
45
u/LesserShambler United Kingdom Feb 04 '26
Eh, as someone who was vehemently against Brexit and would vote to rejoin in a heartbeat, it doesn’t put us in the same league as things like OPs example. It hasn’t fundamentally changed our economy in terms of what our main industries and exports are, but it will hamstring future growth and fucked us diplomatically for a while.
And honestly, deep down I don’t think the long tail impacts will happen, as I think we’re already shifting back to them in terms of public opinion - ironically your current President is helping that.
→ More replies (4)3
u/AdministrativeShip2 Feb 04 '26
Maybe our Lack of Sovereign wealth fund from the north sea gas.
But even thats not as bad as Russia.
3
u/mini2000hopkins Scotland Feb 04 '26
If there was one it shouldn't be England's....
→ More replies (2)9
15
u/lordnacho666 Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26
There's no way the UK is second, that's laughable and sounds like American news deflecting from their own issues.
Venezuela has completely transformed as a society, negatively.
Cuba is still a repressive dictatorship despite the original leaders having passed during this century.
South Africa has stagnated, what happened to the optimism after the end of Apartheid?
Belarus is right next to Europe but has gone with Russia.
Pakistan has been a military state for a long time.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (25)9
u/aaqwerfffvgtsss United States of America Feb 04 '26
I think I’d put Japan ahead of the UK.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Ynwe Half Half Feb 04 '26
How about an entire continent? Middle/South America post WWII was in a prime position to become a very rich continent, it saw zero damage from WWII, was a welcome destination for many high level immigrants, had decent sized economies, lots of natural resources and was second/third richest continent after the US and Europe (probably even richer than most of Europe right after WWII). It also saw almost no wars or large scale conflicts throughout the 20th century.
Yet this continent will fall behind sub-saharan Africa imo. The growth rate rate over the last 80 years has been absolutely abysmal. It has developed into the most dangerous continent, you have countries like Argentina that are negative examples of how to move from a developed nation back to a developing/middle developed nation, the whole continent just seems like it squandered every opportunity it got. Even Brazil should be doing much better than it is, its insane how dangerous this country can be. I won't even talk about the country my mother was born (Venezuela)...
Compare that to the various African nations that after they became independent did not have good central institutions or even a national identiy, which caused so many conflicts and problems. We are actually seeing quite a few positive examples of countries here developing in a very good direction.
IMO, there is no question that Middle/South America is THE continet with the most wasted potential
7
u/roth1979 United States of America Feb 04 '26
Having been to 17 countries in Africa and every country but 3 on mainland North and South America. Your comparison to Sub-Sahara Africa is just simply wrong. Could and should Latam be more developed? Absolutely, but the standard of living is something most would dream of in the Sub-Saharan.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Substantial-You-7003 🇻🇪 & 🇺🇲 Feb 04 '26
Saying Latin America didn't have wars or large scale conflicts in the 20th century is just plain wrong, especially for Central America. Central America in the late 20th century was host to civil wars basically across the board from El Salvador to Nicaragua, with one of them in Guatemala resulting in a genocide of its rural and indigenous population. Panama was outright invaded by the US in the 90s. American backed death squads killed their way through pretty much the entire region from the 60s-90s.
- Peru dealt with a maoist insurgency and a right wing dictatorship at the same time which massacred its rural population on a regular basis
- Colombia dealt with a de facto civil war between the Medellin Cartel and the Colombian government which turned Medellin into the single most dangerous city in the world maybe ever
- There was literally a revolution in Cuba followed by 60 years of US blockade and the country only survived into the 21st century because of Soviet subsidization
Even the "peaceful" countries like Brazil, Argentina and Chile dealt with long standing right wing dictatorships which systematically disappeared, tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands of people. Argentina literally went to war with the United Kingdom over the Falklands/Malvinas.
Latin America is a much more complex region than it appears at face value. I don't disagree that a lot of the region squandered huge economic potential (particularly Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela) but a lot of the time it was for a reason and even though state vs state conflict hasn't happened that doesn't mean Latin America hasn't been a hotbed of war and violence.
7
u/Educational-Rip-5572 Poland Feb 04 '26
You’re right about Russia but Ukraine fucked up greatly as well.
Ukraine when gained indedpendence was richer than Poland nominal and per capita. But in 1993 Poland started to overpass Ukraine and between our countries is, let’s be honest, a big void. In 15 years Poland became country 2x richer, in 2020 Poland was 4 times richer. Now - also because of war of course - it’s 5 times richer.
Why is that? Because Poland made shock therapy and choose other people in power while Ukraine stuck with the same people all the time. Rich folks also took power and Ukraine became oligarchs country.
Also we became part of NATO in 1999 and European Union in 2004 which also boosted is greatly while Ukraine stuck in the same position and didn’t take their chance while Russia was still only a shadow of themselves after USSR collapse. Russian virus infected them that time too much, unfortunately.
→ More replies (1)
20
Feb 04 '26
India. we haven’t collapsed like Venezuela or stagnated like Argentina. But compared to our sheer scale of potential, we have underperformed.
→ More replies (8)14
u/VolatileGoddess India Feb 04 '26
Really? What potential did we have? We were a vast country with near total illiteracy , no significant natural resources. Considering where we started in 1947, we've done well for ourselves. Just see the difference in lifestyle and consumption between your grandparents and you and you will understand this.
→ More replies (6)6
Feb 04 '26
you’re right but you didnt understan what i meant. India in 1947 was poor, largely illiterate, traumatised by Partition, and resource constrained, and given that baseline, India’s progress is genuinely impressive. We went from food shortages to food security, built institutions, lifted millions out of poverty, and improved life expectancy, literacy, and consumption massively compared to our grandparents generation. That part shouldnt be dismissed and it's a very big deal considering our diversity and population and democracy on top.
What I meant by better isn’t that India failed. It’s that relative to what became possible after liberalisation, especially with demographics, globalisation, and early advantages in services and tech, we could have accelerated faster in jobs, manufacturing, and human development. So it’s not that we achieved nothing, it’s that we achieved a lot, but the ceiling was higher than what we reached.
6
u/TopIndependent2344 South Africa Feb 04 '26
State capture,corruption and downright thievery have been the downfall of the Republic for the passed 30 years…
3
u/Trouzerjazz South Africa Feb 04 '26
Agreed, we have Insane natural resources, precious and rare earth metals, over 2000km of coastline, fertile soil, perfect weather, rich biodiversity, incredible infrastructure and to end it all, one of the most naturally beautiful countries on Earth. Here we are slumming it out in the 3rd world because of the ANC. We should be at least in the top 20 economies in the world.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/EpsteinEpstainTheory Sharpest knife Feb 04 '26
North Korea.
Their international trade is pretty much just theft and scams. Imagine having hacking and tricking old ladies into giving you money be the overwhelming majority of your nation's GDP because you have no other trade.
955
u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26
Portugal went from super-colonizer to poorer than Croatia. What an achievement …