False hope this helps. mark as brainliest please
Globalization must be expected to influence the distribution of income as well as its level. So far as the distribution of income between countries is concerned, standard theory would lead one to expect that all countries will benefit. Economists have long preached that trade is mutually beneficial, and most of us believe that the experience of widespread growth alongside rapidly growing trade in the postwar period serves to substantiate that. Similarly most FDI goes where a multinational has intellectual capital that can contribute something to the local economy, and is therefore likely to be mutually beneficial to investor and recipient. And a flow of capital that finances a real investment is again likely to benefit both parties, since the yield on the investment is expected to be higher than the rate of interest the borrower has to pay, while that rate of interest is also likely to be higher than the lender could expect at home since otherwise there would have been no incentive to send it abroad. Loose talk about free trade making the rich countries richer and poor countries poorer finds no support in economic analysis.
Statistically, Less developed countries typically spend over half of their household income on food. In 2016 a survey showed that out of nine less developed countries observed, four were in Africa, four in Asia, and one in South America, below is the outcome of the survey.
<u>AFRICA</u>
Nigeria 56.4%.
Kenya 46.7%.
Cameroon 45.6%.
Algeria 42.5%.
<u>ASIA</u>
Kazakhstan 43.0%.
the Philippines 41.9%.
Pakistan 40.9%.
Azerbaijan 40.1%.
Guatemala is the only country from South American to appear on the list and families here spend about 40.6% of its income on food.
However, with the crisis in Zimbabwe, Somalia, Sudan, and other less developed countries facing Economic, financial and food crisis, it is estimated that as at January 2019, they spend almost 87% of their household income on food.
