Espousing an old no longer relevant definition to sound smarter and be "right" is peak lemmy/reddit behavior. Third world does mean poor now.

No one really uses that word in its Cold War context anymore. It's the common term for "developing countries" and the like.

It used to mean that. First World was US aligned (or at least US friendly), Second World was Soviet aligned, Third World was not aligned

Now though, First World means developed nations, Third World means poor nations, Second World has fallen out of use

Spain isn't third world, it already had shown the middle finger to Trump and also has few to do with Rusia. Third world countries don't certainly mean people starving, the people there often have all what they need, but this, you'll see few Ferraries there and chalets with swimming pool. Someone is rich, not necesarly because a lot of money, but because he need only few. We often enter in a rabbit hole of the consumism, spending a lot of money in things we really don't need, we work like a dog to have enough money to pay a journey to Hawaii to recover us from the burnout, which we wouldn't have working less, no needing this journey.

If you can eat well for $1 then it is definitely a poor country relative to the US. Differences in purchasing power are a direct result of differences in wealth.