From Oldest to Poorest

For those who don't know, I sponsor a child. He's about a year and a half old, named Alexander and lives in Paraguay. His birthday's the day after mine, he loves bananas and he has the cutest face. About a week ago, I got the 2011 Christmas catalogue from the company, saying "here's some things that people need, would you buy them one? Or buy one in the name of a friend?". I have no issues with it. In a few years when I can afford more, sure I'll pay an extra bit of money for some toys, an animal or help sanitary conditions. But right now, the $38 a month is the best I can afford.

The question is...why do people need to do this? I'm not asking why do we give money to those who need it, but why do these people not have the necessities? What really gets me is the places that are considered developing and third world countries. And these places are countries like Africa and India, places that are where humans may have first arisen. So, if they were here first, why are they the worse off?

Is it like the situation when there's a new baby in the family? Everyone coos over the new one (North America) and forget about the others (Africa, India). North America was among the last one colonized during the migrations 20,000-40,000 years ago, and when the Europeans came over 500 years ago.

But, people in Africa were, arguably, on the planet first. So again, I ask, why are they the worse off? I don't have an answer. Maybe someone else does? I welcome comments that tell me I'm wrong (I'd prefer it in the form of constructive criticism of course).