Egypt's population officially reaches 93 millions: CAPMAS

[Saif al-Arab]

I am not an Indian as you can see from my flags..... Get a life!

You are not an Indian (anyway that is a 70 year old invention and composed of 100's of different ethnic groups (almost as diverse as Sub-Saharan Africa which is the most ethnically diverse place on earth) - what is modern-day India was never ruled as a single unit, all of it, by any dynasty in history) but if you are a Tamil for instance you have more brethren living in modern-day India (South India next door) than in Sri Lanka proper.

If you are a Sinhalese you are closely related to Tamils and correct me if I am not wrong but I once read/heard that Sinhalese and Bengalis are closely related. And if I am not wrong there are almost 100 million Bengalis in India.
If you are a Moor, who are supposed Sri Lankans of Arab ancestry, most of them have assimilated and mixed with locals for centuries so even they have ties to India.
So whether you like it or not you have close ties to Indians. I know that you Indians and Sri Lankans have a rivalry but that is what it is. Mostly a recent thing.

Also there is one thing I don't understand. Is 10-15% of Pakistan's population not made up by Muhajirs (an Arabic word meaning migrant in case foreigners won't understand this) who mainly originate from India? How do those people feel about the hostility between Pakistan and India? I imagine that it must be quite a dilemma as all of them arrived after Pakistan's foundation in 1947 which is very recent in terms of history and many of those that arrived are still alive. I always wanted to ask this but never bothered to create a thread here as I believe that it will result in trolling. In fact I might be accused of trolling.

@Sher Shah Awan bro, are you Pakistani Exile? Maybe you can answer my "controversial" question. Thanks.

Similarly do Indian Hindu Bengalis feel any kinship to Bangladeshi Muslim Bengalis across the border? Once again an example of two countries whose populations seem to hate each other. At least on PDF. For me as an Arab this is very strange as I do not know any Arabs that hate other Arabs (other nationalities) just across the border no matter possible rivalry created by leaderships. Until recently it was very common for Arabs (all Arab neighbors of KSA as an example) to visit each other and extended families, to intermarry etc. That is why there are deep and historic tribal ties that transcend borders in the Arab world. A good recent example that non-Arabs learned, is the Syrian-Iraqi border and the Sunni Arab communities on both sides of the border who are family. As in literally family. Same story in all the border regions of KSA. So for me as an Arab it is very hard to understand the hostility that people belonging to the same ethnicities and speaking the same language and sharing the same culture (more or less) hating each other as much as I have witnessed people from South Asia do. Is the average Pakistani Punjabi willing to go to war and kill his Punjabi Indian brethren across the border?

 

[Frogman]

They still like control 20-30% of the civilian economy despite the fact that they are the military.

That figure has no real academic or economic basis.

The military has 20 companies under the purview of the Ministry for Military Production which shares a budget with the Armed Forces which in total amounts to 5% of Egypt's yearly governmental spend. Even with healthy profits they couldn't breach 4% of Egypt's entire GDP.

The largest buyer from those companies is the military itself as they are its essential logistical tail. This is standard practice in many countries. The alternative is relying on private companies which is an example you don't want to follow, just look at the UK for that model going tits up.

It's a convenient fib which goes alongside claims of Mubaraks billions and Judge/military/police wages as the primary reasons for Egypt's economic woes and what we need to "get back" to fix this mess. It's all rather fanciful.

 

[KediKesenFare3]

Which will become a problem for those people and their economies at one point in time. Already signs of that. Most Arab states have a healthy population growth rate which makes the populations of Arab countries dynamic and young which you cannot buy for money.

Why is that a good thing? It's not like Arab countries and developments on all fronts are stagnating (rather the contrary) that no local industries (which already exist) will emerge or that Turkish products are the only alternative. The existing Turkish-Arab trade (negligible in the wider picture at least for the Arab world) will grow but it's not like Turkey will benefit from the trade more than Arab countries themselves or other countries. In fact main industrial nations such as US, China, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, South Korea etc. are those that will benefit the most if anything. But first and foremost the Arab countries themselves will benefit from it. Large populations = larger economies. That's more or less inevitable. Same story with Pakistan. If Pakistan had a 4 times smaller population they could only dream about reaching top 20 in terms of largest economies. Due to their population this is a very realistic and achievable goal in a few decades almost regardless of the economic policies. The sheer numbers alone will ensure this. Same story with Egypt.

As mentioned earlier,as long as it is a controlled population growth (which is the case nowadays) and as long as Egypt keeps progressing it should not become a too big challenge. It's not like they or Arabs lack space. Technological progress (inevitable) will also tackle issues such as water, food, desertification while economic growth will take care of housing, healthcare, education etc. KSA's population growth has been one of the largest/most dynamic percentage wise in the past 50 years and many doomsday theories were published 40-50 years ago and none of this occurred. Rather had KSA's population remained 4-5 million big as 60-70 years ago, we would have been nobodies today and we could only dream about having the world's 13th largest economy (top 15 in general) as per most surveys by 2050.

And Arabs are different indeed on this front. For us having large families is a gift not a burden. My family is upperclass and yet I have 7 siblings (numerous nephews and TONS of cousins) and I would not trade that for anything in the world. I can't imagine having no siblings (or 1-2) or very few cousins. A big family is a gift not a burden.

Sorry, but you won't find one single serious scientist on this planet who'll agree that the population growth in the Arab world is good, sustainable or even wealth-creating.

And I am no going to debate with you about such obvious, very well-known and scientifically proven facts.

The Arab world will experience some serious problems with its current population growth:

• labor is cheaper in some parts of Asia and black Africa
• no Arab country is rich enough to afford this growth (even GCC states like Oman could face financial problems in the future)
• the Arab world doesn't have the high tech and scientific base to create large amounts of wealth
• throughout human history, nations with many young people are prone to crisis (Iran and Turkey will be more stable in the long term compared to non-GCC Arab countries)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Revolution

etc.pp.

Don't try to make every development in the Arab world look good. Of course, every social change has its pros and cons but in this case potential disadvantages are considered to outweigh the expected benefits.

 

[Muhammed45]

Egypt should be a major power

They already are Mike.

military

Indeed especially in this case. However mostly an importer but the geographical point of Egypt makes it a field of competition between eastern and western powers.
Their economy can grow only if they get rid of monarchs an import the required oil from Iraq.

The best wishes for Egypt and it's people who once kicked colonialists out of their motherland, Mike!!!

 

[Pakistani E]

Also there is one thing I don't understand. Is 10-15% of Pakistan's population not made up by Muhajirs (an Arabic word meaning migrant in case foreigners won't understand this) who mainly originate from India? How do those people feel about the hostility between Pakistan and India? I imagine that it must be quite a dilemma as all of them arrived after Pakistan's foundation in 1947 which is very recent in terms of history and many of those that arrived are still alive. I always wanted to ask this but never bothered to create a thread here as I believe that it will result in trolling. In fact I might be accused of trolling.

@Sher Shah Awan bro, are you Pakistani Exile? Maybe you can answer my "controversial" question. Thanks.

Similarly do Indian Hindu Bengalis feel any kinship to Bangladeshi Muslim Bengalis across the border? Once again an example of two countries whose populations seem to hate each other. At least on PDF.

Yes bro, it's me.

And I also have relatives who camefrom India during 1947. On the whole they are pro Pakistani, there was an attempt by Altaf Hussain, leader of MQM which draws most of it support from thoses who's ancestors migrated from India, to sprout some pro Indian rubbish and chanted anti Pakistani slogans, but most of his own party have turned against him and no longer consider him their leader.

But yes, they do have relatives in India, even I have distant relatives in India, through marriage, but there is no love for India amongst that population group. There are several Pakistanis on this forum who are descendants of those who migrated in 1947 and you will find them to be the most anti Indian. This is something that I have noticed too in that part of my own family, they are far more nationalist types than people from another ethnicity because they had to face radical mobs of Hindus and Sikhs.

I mean there are a very tiny number who hold pro Indian views, but they have no popular support amongst Muhajir or Urdu speaking community, as I prefer to call them as I do not believe they are migrants anymore.

@haviZsultan @Areesh can shed more light on this as they are more knowledgeable on this topic.

 

[Frogman]

They already are Mike.

Actually we haven't been for a long long time.

 

[NoOne'sBoy]

You are not an Indian (anyway that is a 70 year old invention and composed of 100's of different ethnic groups (almost as diverse as Sub-Saharan Africa which is the most ethnically diverse place on earth) - what is modern-day India was never ruled as a single unit, all of it, by any dynasty in history) but if you are a Tamil for instance you have more brethren living in modern-day India (South India next door) than in Sri Lanka proper.

If you are a Sinhalese you are closely related to Tamils and correct me if I am not wrong but I once read/heard that Sinhalese and Bengalis are closely related. And if I am not wrong there are almost 100 million Bengalis in India.
If you are a Moor, who are supposed Sri Lankans of Arab ancestry, most of them have assimilated and mixed with locals for centuries so even they have ties to India.
So whether you like it or not you have close ties to Indians. I know that you Indians and Sri Lankans have a rivalry but that is what it is. Mostly a recent thing.

I am Sinhalese and I don't have any rivalry with India but that's me as an individual (I am not nationalist at all and I believe in the modern nation-state model based on opportunity, liberty and democracy) but you are right that lots of people consider India to be hostile and this feeling comes from being a small country next to massive neighbours. It exists everywhere as well, for instance, Baltics towards Russia. I do have a lot to do with India but I don't consider myself an Indian. Why would I? Quite similarly, smaller nations around Russia don't consider themselves as Russian although they have a lot to do with Russia. And Switzerland too is fiercely independent and considers their diversity as a unique attribute. Even their dialect of German is unique. Going by that logic we should all consider ourselves as African as our ancestors came from Africa.

By the way, Sri Lanka, at least the Sinhalese part, was an independent entity for most of its history.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Sorry, but you won't find one single serious scientist on this planet who'll agree that the population growth in the Arab world is good, sustainable or even wealth-creating.

And I am no going to debate with you about such obvious, very well-known and scientifically proven facts.

The Arab world will experience some serious problems with its current population growth:

• labor is cheaper in some parts of Asia and black Africa
• no Arab country is rich enough to afford this growth (even GCC states like Oman could face financial problems in the future)
• the Arab world doesn't have the high tech and scientific base to create large amounts of wealth
• throughout human history, nations with many young people are prone to crisis (Iran and Turkey will be more stable in the long term compared to non-GCC Arab countries)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Revolution

etc.pp.

Don't try to make every development in the Arab world look good. Of course, every social change has its pros and cons but in this case potential disadvantages are considered to outweigh the expected benefits.

Well, I have seen plenty so that is wrong. Also population growth will always stabilize itself. Where were those scientists when 500 million big China was piss poor (current Sub-Saharan standards) in the late 1940's? Today their population has almost grown by 300% and look where they are. Even India has improved despite a giant population boom. Same story with Pakistan and Bangladesh. Even Sub-Saharan African countries such as Nigeria and Ethiopia, mainly due to their population growth, have experienced a unprecedented economic boom and already today have sizable economies for their regions standards. That would never have been possible had they had small populations. Their living standards have also improved despite a big population boom.

No matter how you spin it, population growth (as long as it is not totally out of control which is not the case anywhere in the Arab world) cannot be negative. A negative growth rate is negative though overall. Look no further than Japan, Ukraine and Eastern Europe in general. West is not as badly hit mainly due to, in great part Arabs, and in general Muslims/non-European minorities who tend to have significantly larger families and due to migration (UK, France and Germany). Which is something they encourage exactly due to economic reasons first and foremost and not out of love for strangers or hospitality.

I don't buy this as the Arab world is progressing on all fronts every year despite growing populations and guess what, this will continue.

As for scientific output, the Arab world (GCC alone) is one of the fastest growing regions on this front so that is also not correct. It makes no sense either as scientific growth is closely tied to economic growth, a bigger talent pool (bigger population - hence why most scientific powers in the world have a sizable population) and education.

I know that the Arab world (already the case) will have much larger economies than Turkey and Iran in the future (no contest really) and much more dynamic and young populations as well. Once the population growth stabilizes and reaches the level of European states such as UK and France (I believe that Arab states will never experience negative growth rate for cultural and religious reasons) it will be from a far bigger end product (population and economy wise) than what Turkey and Iran will have whose populations are predicted to fall not grow by 2050. In fact I believe that Iraq alone will have more people by 2050 than those two countries combined if the predictions are correct.

 

[Pakistani E]

Similarly do Indian Hindu Bengalis feel any kinship to Bangladeshi Muslim Bengalis across the border? Once again an example of two countries whose populations seem to hate each other. At least on PDF. For me as an Arab this is very strange as I do not know any Arabs that hate other Arabs (other nationalities) just across the border no matter possible rivalry created by leaderships. Until recently it was very common for Arabs (all Arab neighbors of KSA as an example) to visit each other and extended families, to intermarry etc. That is why there are deep and historic tribal ties that transcend borders in the Arab world. A good recent example that non-Arabs learned, is the Syrian-Iraqi border and the Sunni Arab communities on both sides of the border who are family. As in literally family. Same story in all the border regions of KSA. So for me as an Arab it is very hard to understand the hostility that people belonging to the same ethnicities and speaking the same language and sharing the same culture (more or less) hating each other as much as I have witnessed people from South Asia do. Is the average Pakistani Punjabi willing to go to war and kill his Punjabi Indian brethren across the border?

I can't speak for Bengalis, don't really know much about the ones in Bangaldesh or India. Completely different ethnic group with different culture.

And yes, Pakistani and Indian Punjabis have and continue to fight for their respective countries. Punjabis will fight over anything anyway. But to be honest, even Punjabi itself is not an ethnicity. It is just someone who lives in Punjab, Punjabis have different origins. Also, I think because of religion and bad blood during partition, there is a lot of hostility.

For example, the tribe I come from claims to have come from Afghanistan with supposed Arab ancestry. Our dialect of Punjabi is completely different from Indian Punjabi. Heck, even other Pakistani Punjabis cannot understand some of our words.

So personally, I do not consider Punjabi an ethnicity, and I think if you speak to most Punjabis they will say the same. It is usually with a particular Punjabi clan or tribe they will identify themselves with unless they are talking to someone who has no clue about the differences.

 

[Muhammed45]

long long time

How long?
Economy is the key of having great population and more labors. You need to import oil from Iraq just like the past

 

[mike2000 is back]

Turks, Persians and to some extent even Kurds don't have many children today. The Arab world is just disappointing again, though, from a Turkish perspective this baby boom is good.

It's even better for industrialised nations (U K, Germany, France, U.S, Japan, S.Korea, China etc). More market for these countries products.
In this regards, we are already by far the largest foreign investor in Egypt, so this will only increase our investments(giving the country's large market), while also enabling Egypt to gain the necessary skills/knowledge to produce more locally. WIN-WIN situation.

Three New Investments Strengthen UK Support to Egypt as Number 1 Investor

23rd November 2016 Mo



CAIRO, Egypt, Since 2011, Foreign Direct Investment inflows from the UK have amounted to USD30 billion. On Tuesday 8 November British Ambassador to Egypt John Casson attended the inauguration of GlaxoSmithKline’s newest liquid line in Egypt, an EGP65 million investment that will produce essential, low-cost medicines for Egyptian patients.

Glaxosmithkline headquarters building in London.

This is delivering on the company’s 2013 pledge to expand its local investments over the course of four years to upgrade its facilities with investments exceeding EGP481 million. GlaxoSmithKline’s total investment in Egypt surpasses USD 800 million and it is the largest British investment in the Health Sector and Pharma field in Egypt.

British Ambassador in Cairo and Egypt's Minister of Finance open the new GSK line

UK Director of Trade and Investment said: The launch of this new line for GSK demonstrates their commitment to the Egyptian market. GSK along with many other UK companies has a long history with Egypt and my team at the Department for International Trade will continue to encourage UK investment in Egypt– something which can only benefit both countries.This GlaxoSmithKline investment is the latest in a series of new investments from Britain, Egypt’s biggest investor.



Last month, Vodafone acquired a EGP3.5 billion 4G licence in addition to its EGP35 billion in investment in Egypt to date, which will increase internet speed and open new economic and social opportunities.Last month British company Unilever opened a new factory in Egypt – the largest in the Middle East in terms of production capacity – following a EGP220 million investment.

BP speeds Phase 1 development of Atoll field offshore Egypt - Oil & Gas

Meanwhile,British Petroleum(BP)continues to be one of the largest foreign investors in the country, having invested approximately USD30 billion in Egypt to date, with plans for a further USD13billion before 2020.



UK investment provides long-term social investment and sustainable growth in Egypt, alongside the short-term action currently being taken by the Government and the IMF. GlaxoSmithKline provides jobs to a workforce of 1,700 Egyptians, and Unilever has 1,939 direct and over 8,000 indirect Egyptian employees. BP Egypt runs a wide-ranging programme focused on education, training, and skills development, and works with local communities to deliver sustainable development projects dedicated to creating jobs, micro-financing, education, and health.



These deals support the UK Prime Minister’s desire to further deepen cooperation and offer help to support the Egypt’s economic growth efforts, including the increase of British investments. The upcoming visit to Egypt by the UK Trade Envoy, the fourth this year, will provide opportunity for discussions around delivering on this desire.



British Ambassador to Egypt said: More important long-term than even the IMF funds, investment creates jobs, and brings in dollars and global standards to Egypt. I am proud Britain remains the number one investor in Egypt, with USD30 billion of inflows since 2011, but at this vital time we are hungry for more to power the Egyptian economy. This month we have seen important new investment and jobs from BP, Vodafone, Unilever and now GlaxoSmithKline. Egypt’s economic success is a top priority to the UK and we remain committed to developing our partnership.



Distributed by APO on behalf of British Embassy Cairo.


http://mareeg.com/three-new-investments-strengthen-uk-support-to-egypt-as-number-1-investor/

 

[Saif al-Arab]

I can't speak for Bengalis, don't really know much about the ones in Bangaldesh or India. Completely different ethnic group with different culture.

And yes, Pakistani and Indian Punjabis have and continue to fight for their respective countries. Punjabis will fight over anything anyway. But to be honest, even Punjabi itself is not an ethnicity. It is just someone who lives in Punjab, Punjabis have different origins. Also, I think because of religion and bad blood during partition, there is a lot of hostility.

For example, the tribe I come from claims to have come from Afghanistan with supposed Arab ancestry. Our dialect of Punjabi is completely different from Indian Punjabi. Heck, even other Pakistani Punjabis cannot understand some of our words.

So personally, I do not consider Punjabi an ethnicity, and I think if you speak to most Punjabis they will say the same. It is usually with a particular Punjabi clan or tribe they will identify themselves with unless they are talking to someone who has no clue about the differences.

Of course once a war erupts and people (soldiers) put their uniforms on it does not matter who is on the opposite side of the barrel. I mean Pakistani and Indian Punjabis as well as Pakistani Mujahir's of various ethnic groups have already fought their brethren so to speak. Same story with numerous Arab countries during the few (albeit they occurred) Arab-Arab conflicts. That's evident.

However my question was more about the people to people relations. Does the average Pakistani Punjabi such as you in the UK feel any affinity to the average Indian Punjabi in the UK? I know that there is the divide in religion between Punjabis in Pakistan and Indian Bengalis and Bangladeshi Bengalis but that should not be too much of a hindrance or is that the case?

Of course modern-day ethnic groups are social constructs like everything else (basically), unless people really believe that entire ethnic groups were created by the same nuclear family and their offspring without any outside "assistance". However you have to agree with me that there is a ethnic group called Punjabi, a language called Punjabi (which like all other larger languages has dialects) a Punjabi culture (which like all culture of larger ethnic groups have different layers depending on the historical regions) and that many Punjabis feel some short of kinship one way or another. There is also a genetic affinity (on a larger scale of course like in any ethnic group not everyone shares the same haplogroup or ancestry but you can make enough conclusions to categorize a group like with other ethnic groups/populations in region x or y of the world).

Anyway I have a few Pashtun friends (1 from Waziristan in Pakistan) and the other is from Kandahar (the Pashtun heartland in Afghanistan if I am not wrong) and they feel an affinity to each other but here I have seen Pashtuns from Pakistan (I don't know if they are false-flaggers or trolls) who feel no affinity to any Afghans.

Anyway I guess this is what makes conflicts in South Asia complicated as there are so many layers and due to the very large diversity. Something that I will never understand either is the case system in India. Won't ever understand it. Sure we Arabs have our retarded sectarian lot, largely a recent phenomenon sadly, but they are in general a very small minority and some of them can change, but once a member of a lower caste it seems that it is a death sentence in India. How can Indians tolerate this I won't ever understand. And there is some religious element (if I am not wrong) involved too to make matters worse so it's not as easy to remove. It's been there for millennia as well if I am not wrong.

Anyway good to see you around here. I hope that you are doing well my friend.

 

[mike2000 is back]

They already are Mike.

Indeed especially in this case. However mostly an importer but the geographical point of Egypt makes it a field of competition between eastern and western powers.
Their economy can grow only if they get rid of monarchs an import the required oil from Iraq.

The best wishes for Egypt and it's people who once kicked colonialists out of their motherland, Mike!!!

Lol I get what you did there with your last point.
Anyway, It's true we did have a tumultuous relationship with Egypt having invaded and ruled the country in the past, and most troubling our invasion of Egypt during Suez Canal crisis again. However, that's in the past, Egypt is a pragmatic country and both countries have moved on from that unfortunate period in their history. Today we are strategic and close partners, with British companies investing heavily in Egypt(a large and promising market) both sides benefits from this fruitful relationship. We live in a globalised world today. No country can live as an island of itself.

Irans should follow Egypt's example instead if dwelling in the past and being constantly suspicious of Britain(the "old fox") and the U.S( the "Great Satan") due to our past invasion of the country and role in your past leader's toppling. Etc. Today we all live in a different world, things are different nowadays.

 

[Muhammed45]

It's even better for industrialised nations (U K, Germany, France, U.S, Japan, S.Korea, China etc). More market for these countries products.
In this regards, we are already by far the largest foreign investor in Egypt, so this will only increase our investments(giving the country's large market), while also enabling Egypt to gain the necessary skills/knowledge to produce more locally. WIN-WIN situation.

Three New Investments Strengthen UK Support to Egypt as Number 1 Investor

23rd November 2016 Mo



CAIRO, Egypt, Since 2011, Foreign Direct Investment inflows from the UK have amounted to USD30 billion. On Tuesday 8 November British Ambassador to Egypt John Casson attended the inauguration of GlaxoSmithKline’s newest liquid line in Egypt, an EGP65 million investment that will produce essential, low-cost medicines for Egyptian patients.

Glaxosmithkline headquarters building in London.

This is delivering on the company’s 2013 pledge to expand its local investments over the course of four years to upgrade its facilities with investments exceeding EGP481 million. GlaxoSmithKline’s total investment in Egypt surpasses USD 800 million and it is the largest British investment in the Health Sector and Pharma field in Egypt.

British Ambassador in Cairo and Egypt's Minister of Finance open the new GSK line

UK Director of Trade and Investment said: The launch of this new line for GSK demonstrates their commitment to the Egyptian market. GSK along with many other UK companies has a long history with Egypt and my team at the Department for International Trade will continue to encourage UK investment in Egypt– something which can only benefit both countries.This GlaxoSmithKline investment is the latest in a series of new investments from Britain, Egypt’s biggest investor.



Last month, Vodafone acquired a EGP3.5 billion 4G licence in addition to its EGP35 billion in investment in Egypt to date, which will increase internet speed and open new economic and social opportunities.Last month British company Unilever opened a new factory in Egypt – the largest in the Middle East in terms of production capacity – following a EGP220 million investment.

BP speeds Phase 1 development of Atoll field offshore Egypt - Oil & Gas

Meanwhile,British Petroleum(BP)continues to be one of the largest foreign investors in the country, having invested approximately USD30 billion in Egypt to date, with plans for a further USD13billion before 2020.



UK investment provides long-term social investment and sustainable growth in Egypt, alongside the short-term action currently being taken by the Government and the IMF. GlaxoSmithKline provides jobs to a workforce of 1,700 Egyptians, and Unilever has 1,939 direct and over 8,000 indirect Egyptian employees. BP Egypt runs a wide-ranging programme focused on education, training, and skills development, and works with local communities to deliver sustainable development projects dedicated to creating jobs, micro-financing, education, and health.



These deals support the UK Prime Minister’s desire to further deepen cooperation and offer help to support the Egypt’s economic growth efforts, including the increase of British investments. The upcoming visit to Egypt by the UK Trade Envoy, the fourth this year, will provide opportunity for discussions around delivering on this desire.



British Ambassador to Egypt said: More important long-term than even the IMF funds, investment creates jobs, and brings in dollars and global standards to Egypt. I am proud Britain remains the number one investor in Egypt, with USD30 billion of inflows since 2011, but at this vital time we are hungry for more to power the Egyptian economy. This month we have seen important new investment and jobs from BP, Vodafone, Unilever and now GlaxoSmithKline. Egypt’s economic success is a top priority to the UK and we remain committed to developing our partnership.



Distributed by APO on behalf of British Embassy Cairo.


http://mareeg.com/three-new-investments-strengthen-uk-support-to-egypt-as-number-1-investor/

@AmirPatriot
Bro, look at this beast's post. I always used to ask myself, why these murderer fukers still have a huge influence in Muslim countries and can take the big Muslim markets despite their filthy past. These fukers have Egyptian blood on their hands but still capable of investing in Muslim countries.
It has only one reason : العلم سلطان
Independent economy, stronger companies, better technologies. That's all and that is why they can have presence even in the countries that once were oppressed by their own governments.
I hope you take my point

 

[NoOne'sBoy]

Looks like @mike2000 is back just stepped on a cat's tail.