Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kuala Lumpur is not a 1st world city.
Hong Kong and Macau are in the tropics, but they don't have a tropical climate.
Taipei neither is in the tropics nor does it have a tropical climate.
I'm not sure I feel comfortable calling Willemstad a city.
Kuala Lumpur seems first world in its first impressions judging from the last time I was there. It seems the most developed city in Malaysia.
Darwin is also in the Tropics. Brisbane is not as it does get cool there at night during the winter months.
Honolulu is also in the tropics.
Bandar Seri Begawan in Brunei is an oil rich small country in South East Asia, and is first world standard of living.
I dont know that much about Kuala Lumpur, but Malaysia already has a relatively high GDP per Capita, so I wouldnt be surprised if Kuala Lumpur really was first world. Wealth tends to be concentrated in major cities many times, so places like Shanghai or Moscow can be considered first world even if the countries they're in are not
Kuala Lumpur seems first world in its first impressions judging from the last time I was there. It seems the most developed city in Malaysia.
Then you haven't been to Kuala Lumpur. There is literally nothing about that city that says "1st world" whether it's the airport or train station, or the numerous shanty like houses that make up most of KL.
Sure you have the Petronas Towers, and some nice buildings but KL is only "1st world" inside those buildings. Once you step outside them, you're in the chaotic developing world.
If your research into this was typing into Google Image search, then I'd like to inform you those photos are highly misleading. I go to KL a lot for business, it's not 1st world at all.
I dont know that much about Kuala Lumpur, but Malaysia already has a relatively high GDP per Capita, so I wouldnt be surprised if Kuala Lumpur really was first world. Wealth tends to be concentrated in major cities many times, so places like Shanghai or Moscow can be considered first world even if the countries they're in are not
I just typed the GDP per capita of Malaysia into Google and got 9,500 USD for 2016. How is this relatively high? Countries that are first world usually begin at 30,000USD with most over 40,000USD? Malaysia is closer to Thailand than it's to 1st world countries in terms of GDP per capita but also in infrastructure.
I just typed the GDP per capita of Malaysia into Google and got 9,500 USD for 2016. How is this relatively high? Countries that are first world usually begin at 30,000USD with most over 40,000USD? Malaysia is closer to Thailand than it's to 1st world countries in terms of GDP per capita but also in infrastructure.
I been to both Malaysia and Thailand. Malaysia is a bit more developed than Thailand. Its economy is a bit more stronger as well. In addition a far higher percentage of Malaysians speak English fluently than in Thailand. To finish secondary or high school Malaysia one needs to pass the English language test.In Thailand English is not so widely spoken or promoted compared to Malaysia. In addition Malaysia population is smaller, and the result is a higher percentage of people in Malaysia have good living standards, compared to Thailand. Also what also drove to Malaysia wealth is due to the oil. Also a factor of Malaysia, was under British occupation, was set to lay the foundations for modern development (which did not benefit the average Malaysians then) yet lay the foundations for the modern world which Thailand lacked.
Due to Malaysia past, of its influence from the British such as infrastructure and language and it being multicultural, shows that Malaysia is more influenced from the outside world than Thailand. That is why Thailand is presently a bit more developed than Thailand.
I been to both Malaysia and Thailand. Malaysia is a bit more developed than Thailand. Its economy is a bit more stronger as well. In addition a far higher percentage of Malaysians speak English fluently than in Thailand. To finish secondary or high school Malaysia one needs to pass the English language test.In Thailand English is not so widely spoken or promoted compared to Malaysia. In addition Malaysia population is smaller, and the result is a higher percentage of people in Malaysia have good living standards, compared to Thailand. Also what also drove to Malaysia wealth is due to the oil. Also a factor of Malaysia, was under British occupation, was set to lay the foundations for modern development (which did not benefit the average Malaysians then) yet lay the foundations for the modern world which Thailand lacked.
Due to Malaysia past, of its influence from the British such as infrastructure and language and it being multicultural, shows that Malaysia is more influenced from the outside world than Thailand. That is why Thailand is presently a bit more developed than Thailand.
If you have truly been then how can you call it 1st world? Have you been to any 1st world cities?
I'm based out of Singapore and been to KL and Bangkok more times than I'd like to remember. TBH, there is no big difference between. In both cases you can find yourself a nice highrise or gated area but as soon as you step outside you're brought back to reality and that reality is not a 1st world one.
I'd like you to make a cogent argument that the infrastructure/level of development of KL is closer to Singapore than it is to Bangkok?
If you have truly been then how can you call it 1st world? Have you been to any 1st world cities?
I'm based out of Singapore and been to KL and Bangkok more times than I'd like to remember. TBH, there is no big difference between. In both cases you can find yourself a nice highrise or gated area but as soon as you step outside you're brought back to reality and that reality is not a 1st world one.
I'd like you to make a cogent argument that the infrastructure/level of development of KL is closer to Singapore than it is to Bangkok?
I been to first world cities and have lived in them, infact I have lived in three world class cities that are not in Asia. I have even been to Singapore.
The UN human development rankings for Thailand is 87th in the World, For Malaysia it is 59th in the world. In addition: Gross national income (GNI) per capita (2011 PPP$) 14,519 and that is for Thailand. For Malaysia it is ross national income (GNI) per capita (2011 PPP$) 24,620 and that is for Malaysia | Human Development Reports
I been to first world cities and have lived in them, infact I have lived in three world class cities that are not in Asia. I have even been to Singapore.
The UN human development rankings for Thailand is 87th in the World, For Malaysia it is 59th in the world. In addition: Gross national income (GNI) per capita (2011 PPP$) 14,519 and that is for Thailand. For Malaysia it is ross national income (GNI) per capita (2011 PPP$) 24,620 and that is for Malaysia | Human Development Reports
I don't believe it. Also your figures don't support the premise KL is a first world city, but instead of posting statistics blindly put your interpretation so there is something to respond to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
