It is quit apparent to the human m ind that the va rious countries instituted around the world have experienced a great deal of economical instability since the formation of independent nations. Unfortunately, until this very day, there is still the existence of poor countries that have yet to converge on the level of economical development mastered by wealthier countries. This problem of national economic hardship, diseasing numerous nations, has ultimately caused many economical and political ideologies to be formulated as an attempt to remedy this common case ofnational disease? that has been around for several years. In other words, many theories have been attained by several intellectuals that have aimed at presenting a possibility of global economic equilibrium. One such theory, the neoclassical economic theory, essentially predicts that if labor and capital intensive products are moderately traded within poor and wealthy nations, the economically deprived countries will eventually converge on the rich countries level of development thus having worldwide economic equilibrium. However, intense evidence suggests that such process can not be undertaken because, as current national economies depict, some economically disadvantaged countries are just not apt to strengthen their weaknesses due to the mechanisms of their government. The ideology of the neoclassical economic theory has been discredited by many recent intellectuals who essentially consider this theory to be a mere attempt of gaining worldwideeconomical utopia.? Scholars such as Paul Romer and Robert Lucas have recently exposed their own ideology regarding economic growth, which has basically made up for the shortfalls of the neoclassical approach to growth. In the following paragraphs, I will initially introduce the general principles of the neoclassical economic theory and its supposed attempt of converging poor countries to the more economically wealthier count...