Quite. The financial inequality between the West and much poorer countries is very sad; however, that is the whole point of a tip: something given voluntarily to somebody (often who doesn't earn very much) who is genuinely pleased (and maybe surprised) to receive it.
The approval of this scenario is quite sickening, actually.
It reeks of white man's burden.
I'm pretty much done with arguing about the rest of it now; but which part of this scenario do you disagree with?
I've made it crystal clear that I most certainly do not approve of the gross inequality between rich and poor countries, so the only other question is whether you agree or disagree with trying to help out a few of the people you encounter when travelling in poor countries or if it would be kinder to keep every penny in your own pocket and then nobody benefits?
Of course, the concept of a tip is by no means exclusive to poorer countries, but the very (original) nature of it is a way of wealthier people giving a small amount of money to poorer people - even within their own country/society; whether out of kindness, thankfulness, pity or to control them.
It was never intended to be a significant amount of money expected/demanded by and given to somebody who is relatively financially equal to yourself, and certainly not to a wealthier person, like these rich waiters we keep hearing about who are coining it in big-time.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't give money to anybody, for any purpose, if they feel the desire to; what I am saying is that the word 'tip' is a complete misnomer here: it is purely an obscured part of the standard price.