Not really. Countries are rich or poor for a variety of reasons, having to do with culture, geography, access to resources, and even random dumb luck (in the sense that a great man can make or destroy a country).
I don't think that South Korea was desperately poor 50 years ago because Koreans were innately stupid, any more than South Korea is wealthy these days because Koreans are innately intelligent.
I don't think that South Korea was desperately poor 50 years ago because Koreans were innately stupid, any more than South Korea is wealthy these days because Koreans are innately intelligent."
Countries are rich or poor based primarily, if not exclusively on the relative amount of freedom their peoples enjoy. The two Koreas are a perfect case in point, as were East and West Germany.
Many nations in Africa are riddled with valuable natural resources yet can not feed their own people. My own state of Louisiana was far and away the wealthiest state of the antebellum south. It's endemic corruption and cultivation of dependency in the post-reconstruction era has left it amongst the poorest states in the entire US.
A country will be rich or poor depending on how much it does or doesn’t respect property rights. Just compare South Korea to North Korea, or Botswana to Ethiopia, or the U.S. to Cuba.