Quote:
|
Fair enough, but isn't China and India still considered "developing" Nations? If they are, I'm pretty sure the U.N. treats the country in a different way and they are not expected to pay for the UN.
|
Yes, these are developing nations and they are handled differently. But labels are of subjective application. The "3rd world" are the "underdeveloped" and "developing" nations. Before the demise of the Soviets the 3rd world could be the "non-aligned". Now that there is no coherent alternative to neoliberalism espoused by any superpower, alignment is just either pro or anti US policy. China and India do get treated differently because they are developing, they have lower hurdles under Kyoto, entitlement to special credits under WTO, are allowed to engage in greater trade protectionism than fully developed countries.
Quote:
|
IF you take out China and India, than the US could very easily still have 20 -25% of the world GDP.
|
I don't think the scheme is unfair, its inaccurate because it hasn't been updated and half a century has resulted in significant changes in the global economic pie.
The US share of the budget helps emphasize the importance of accomodating them, so making it more accurate might also diminish their influence, enhance that of others assuming the obligation.