Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

Comprehension:

Every label has its problems — and, as it turns out, an interesting back story. Here's what I learned from talking to many, many experts.

More than half a century ago, the Cold War was just starting. It was Western capitalism versus Soviet socialism. But there was another group of countries. Many of them were former colonies. None of them were squarely in either the Western or the Soviet camp. Thinking of
these three factions, French demographer Alfred Sauvy wrote of "Three Worlds, One Planet" in an article published in ‘L'Observateur’ in 1952. The First World consisted of the US, Western Europe and their allies. The Second World was the so-called Communist Bloc: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and friends. The remaining nations, which aligned with neither group, were assigned to the Third World.

The Third World has always had blurred lines. "Although the phrase was widely used, it was never clear whether it was a clear category of analysis, or simply a convenient and rather vague label for an imprecise collection of states in the second half of the 20th century and
some of the common problems that they faced," writes historian BR Tomlinson in his essay titled ‘What was the Third World?’, published in 2003 in the ‘Journal of Contemporary History’.

Because many countries in the Third World were impoverished, the term came to be used to refer to the poor world. "This 1-2-3 classification is now out-of-date, insulting and confusing." Who is to say which part of the world is "first"? And how can an affluent country like Saudi Arabia, neither Western nor communist, be part of the Third World? Plus, the Soviet Union doesn't even exist anymore.

And it's not like the First World is the best world in every way. It has pockets of deep urban and rural poverty, says Paul Farmer, co-founder of the nonprofit Partners in Health and a professor at Harvard Medical School. "That's the Fourth World, "Farmer says, referring to parts of the United States and other wealthy nations where health problems loom large.

‘Developing countries’ sounds like it might be a better choice. On the surface, it seems accurate. We're writing about countries that need to develop better health care systems, better schools, better ways to bring water and electricity to people.

(However)… when you think about it, 'developing countries' are quite developed in some respects. In countries where government safety nets are practically nonexistent, people step forward to help out, says Mead Over, who studies the economics of health interventions at the Center for Global Development.

Maybe the solution is to come up with a classification that is based on data. That's how the World Health Organization categorises countries. It uses the term "low-and lower-middle-income countries" or LMIC for short. The LMIC category is based on World Bank statistics that divide countries based on gross domestic product: There are low income, lower middle income, middle income and high income.