why there should be so much differences among nations and people? is there any possibility of equality among p

Answer 1

It is a question of races and hemisphere location ( check the earth and you´ll see a big difference between north and south , and whites , japs and the rest of the world population)

Answer 2

The most popular modern ethical and philosophical doctrines state that all humans are divided into groups called nations.The nationals are distinguished by common identity and origin. ...

A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality. A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.

Depending on the climatic conditions the food habits differs,depending on the natural resources the economy differs....coming to equality we are all same human beings,Hope for the possiblity you were looking in your question....all the best.

Answer 3

Today it is the most funny question as for the last 5000 or more years the administrators and scholars were seeking the answer for this. But note, "I do enjoy my creations because fo the diversity and I need the unity of all this differences for the upliftment. But I have entrusted the rulers of the universe to activate and reactivate. The first action was done by me and rest I left for all. Once if all you are together and call me, I would appear in front of you in person" This to told from the yore.

Answer 4

respected sir,
yes,i accept there is so much difference among the peoples &nations.YES But there is a possiblity of equality among the peoples,in this way see ,if there is a war among the nations we all peoples all our country joins hands to hands together to save our country ,at that time we dont think that he is muslim or hindu or sikh we all fight together.this is our equality.we cant say that there is no equality between the peoples of our nation.
thanks

Answer 5

It is law of nature and these differences are here to stay as long as man kind lives. We have to strive and achieve to have harmony among all different people.

Answer 6

Accept the Islam and feel equality as they do.
They pray together a king and a poorman and everyone. noone can forbid to do together. Allah says in Qur'an
Every human being is equal but who is good who do good. white man is not good than black and not rich man than poor. but who do good is best in all.

Answer 7

If there is no inequality, there will be no competion, which is the sole of Human Development from the very of its beginning. So be inequal, and enjoy get the next par of line.

Answer 8

Differences between nations in income are basically due to differences in their populations’ intelligence. Countries with more intelligent populations are better able to master complex modern technologies and hence enjoy higher standards of living.
In 1998 there was a correlation of 0.733 between real gross domestic product and the national IQ calculated over eighty-one nations. The gross domestic products here have been calculated using published exchange rates. Since some think it is more accurate to compare national incomes in terms of what the incomes will actually purchase, results are also presented and compared for gross domestic products using purchasing power parity. For sixty-five countries with suitable data in 1998, the correlation was 0.775.

IQ explains part of the differences in national product, but only part. The natural question is what explains the part of national income that is not explained by the level of national intelligence: the residuals. Presumably, it is some factor specific to one or more countries. A few of the largest positive residuals can be explained for 1998. Equatorial Guinea has such a low measured IQ that the regression equation predicts a negative national product. Since this is impossible, it has a large positive residual. Qatar has an income well above expectation; this is probably explained by income from oil production. Barbados has a positive residual; this may also be explained by natural resources (Barbados is a well-located tropical island), which makes possible enough well-paying jobs to raise its income above what it would otherwise be.
Kuwait, Bahrain, Brunei, Gabon, and the United Arab Emirates are added to Qatar as countries whose high income is explained by oil. Botswana benefits from diamonds. The Bahamas, Antigua and Barbados, Cyprus, Malta, and St. Kitts and Nevis appear to be other island states for which tourism (related to natural resources) raises income.

Standard economic theory has always recognized that national income is influenced by the quantity and quality of natural resources. Possession of oil is probably the most important of such natural resources. It would appear an even more important factor, except that IQ data are lacking for most of the world’s thinly populated oil-producing countries. Although less important in the world economy, small islands with good beaches (an island can have a high ratio of beaches, coral reefs, and picturesque ports to population), distinct cultures, and the possibility of exploiting their independent status to become an international financial center are provided for in mainstream theory. A relatively small number of tourist-related and financial service jobs can raise national income appreciably in a small country. Of course, the percentage of the world’s population on such islands is small.

Similar analyses are provided for historical data on national incomes along with attempts to explain the outliers. For instance in 1900 Argentina, Australia, and New Zealand had large positive residuals, which the authors attribute to these countries efficiency of agriculture and livestock production. An economist might note their large amounts of good farmland per capita and predict that this would raise their income above what would be justified by their labor inputs alone. When this higher income was divided by the population, their per capita incomes would be found to be above average.

Many of the positive and negative residuals in the historical data can be explained by whether the “industrial revolution” had reached them yet. For historical reasons industrialization began first in northwestern Europe, then spread slowly across the rest of the world. The largest negative residuals in earlier data included China, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia, Taiwan, and Thailand, which the industrial revolution had not yet reached.

Similar attempts are made to explain the deviations for 1930 and 1960, but the accounts seem a little ad hoc and thin.
Let us return to understanding today’s national incomes. South Africa has a large positive residual; yet is a mixed-race country with the key decision makers and business leaders drawn from the white population. This case suggests an important qualification. Perhaps what is important is not so much the average intelligence (which is the variable used) as the fraction of the population that is of high intelligence, and thus able to organize industry and trade. In a country with a homogeneous population, the fraction with high ability can be calculated from the mean IQ and the standard deviation (or just from the mean if one assumes the standard deviations are typical). In a country with several distinct populations, however, the number of very able individuals will exceed what would otherwise be calculated from the average IQ. South Africa, with its large white minority in a predominantly black population, would be expected to have more individuals in the IQ ranges needed to understand modern technology than would have been predicted from its average IQ. This qualification could be important for a number of other countries.

More countries with negative residuals may be explained by special factors. Samoa and Tonga are small and isolated, which, it is suggested, limits their income (presumably if they had been close to North America or Europe they might have been more like Barbados and been above the regression line). Iraq suffers from the sanctions imposed after the Gulf War. Uruguay and Peru have lower than expected incomes, which is attributed to their high inflation rates. The authors note that most of Latin America has negative residuals. This suggests to them (and other authors) certain cultural factors.

Several Asian countries had appreciably negative residuals. The problem in the Philippines is related to ethnic strife (which they also give as a possible reason for poor performance in South American Surinam). They also suggest that shortfalls in Indonesia and Thailand may be related to lingering effects of the Asian economic crisis. Taiwan and South Korea are other Asian countries whose incomes are less than would be predicted. Although these countries are considered among the “Asian Tigers” because of their economic success, their populations do so well on intelligence tests.

The largest group of nations with positive residuals are technologically highly developed, Western, and East Asian: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Ireland, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States, which all have market economies.

Of the countries whose incomes are appreciably lower than would be expected from their levels of intelligence, six are former socialist countries (Bulgaria, China, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Russia). The residuals are negative for all former or current communist countries. The low incomes of these countries are a result of their former political and economic systems.