rudra prasad upadhya, Even if not much, money will trickle from the taxpayers. The money could have been used to develop villages, but instead, it goes into royalites pockets. In Nepal's situation, benefits can be given indirectly. By building roads etc. The money that the king spent in buying jaguar could be used to do so much in a small villages. All poors in America are not lazy bums as you mentioned. Someone who earns mininum wage and is a single parent needs benefits. But then lazy bums also take advantage of it. That's why there is no 'utopia'. How much did Bill Gates get criticized for hoarding money? Because of his wife, some knowledge about philanthropy has trickled in his head and has started giving away his wealth. I believe America grew rapidly because it won the second world war and could afford to buy big brains from all around the world. When you win the war, you get your say. I believe complete capitalism cannot exist as there needs to be some amount of balance. If there is no balance, people will be ready to even give life for money, because they won't have enough to eat. Not all people have enough brain to compete, so does that mean they deserve to die of hunger? And even if they have enough brain, in a competition, if one person wins, the other has to lose. So does that mean the one who lost deserve to die of hunger? In villages of nepal, as people start going to school and start learning, they will also learn that ktm is the land of opportunities, learn what money can buy and they start leaving their villages. As a consequence there is rise in population in ktm. So if the descision makers are not careful about developing villages, the situation in nepal is going to get more worse. India and China will ofcourse develop if they start spending their money to build their infrastructure. But so far it hasn't happended.