= new reply since forum marked as read
Wow. Just wow! 
It would serve a lot of these religious types a lesson if they elect a woman.
It's not like it would be against their history.
K&R
I don't care how old he is or what grade he's in, he's got a head on those shoulders. I hope he is the future of Egypt! Thanks for posting this, ashling..... 
Last edited Tue Jul 9, 2013, 02:36 PM - Edit history (1)
Lets remember Egypt is a very poor county. :
From the World's Bank:
The Household Income, Expenditure and Consumption Survey (HIECS) for 2010/2011 showed that the poverty rate increased from 21.6 percent in 2008/09 to 25.2 percent in 2010/11. Conversely, the extreme poverty rate declined from 6.1 percent in 2008/09 to 4.8 percent. Inequality remained constant over the last 2 years, according to the Gini coefficient recorded with 31 percent in both 2008/09 and 2010/11. Although only a little over half of the population lives in rural areas, more than 78 percent of the poor and 80 percent of the extreme poor live there. These income disparities are reinforced by the gaps in social indicators, where virtually all health indicators and literacy rates are worse in Upper Egypt than in Lower Egypt and worse in rural areas than in urban areas.
http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/egypt/overview
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2013/0225/Egypt-s-economy-is-collapsing-and-no-one-is-stopping-it
http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist-320124-egypt-threatened-by-an-economic-meltdown.html
The problem is no one wants to do what is needed to fix the economy of Egypt. With 25% of its population in Poverty, and another 35% near poverty, you have over 60% of the population that can NOT afford the food they need to survive. Now, Flour is and has been subsidized for decades, this was to keep this 60% of the population from revolting. No one wants to cut out the Subsidy, but it is hurting the State AND given the raise in grain prices, what the lower 60% pays for food has climb so much that anything but Flour is out of reach.
To make a Long Story short, Government Spending needs to be cut, but if the Government cuts its subsidy on Flour, it will face continued unrest. Thus it has to cut the Military OR increase taxes on the upper 40%. The upper 40% of any population can be divided into three groups, the top .1%, the people with all the money. These would be rich people even in the US and deals with the top .1% in the rest of the world all the time.
The next lower 9.9% (often called the top 10% for they tend to by nothing but sycophants of the top .1% and thus thing just like the top .1%, this is the traditional "Middle Class" not the "Middle Class" most Americans believe they are in, often called the "Upper Middle Class" are often the movers and shakers of society. These are the Officers in the Army and other people in industry and government.
You then have the next lower 20-30% of the population, people who do not deal with the top ,1% themselves, but are tools the top .1% use to gather they money from the bottom 60%. This is the traditional "Petty Middle Class", not workers, but management and professionals. These are the people who the members of the Working Class have to deal with on a daily basis. The income of the "Petty Middle Class" tends to be substantially higher then the lower 60%. The problem is when the Working Class (the bottom 60%) hit what is called the "Iron rule of Wages" i.e. that point where people will revolt rather then take further pay cuts (Pay cuts demanded by the upper .1% due to their demands for increase in profits) and thus it is impossible to demand more from the working class, the top .1% demands its increase profits from the "Petty Middle Class".
When this occurs the Petty Middle Class demand that the workers take the cut instead for that is what workers had done in the past, but having hit the "Iron rule of Wages" labor can not, thus the Petty Middle Class are caught in a bind and tend to radicalize themselves, but against the workers, their perceived enemies, not the upper .1%. This continues till enough of the Petty Middle Class loses their income so they also hit the "Iron Rule of Wages" and tend then to join the Working Class in revolt.
It is as the point when the Petty Middle Class hits the Iron Rule of Wages that Marxist revolutions occur. You have unrest prior to that point, even over throwing of Governments but not a Marxist revolution till the Upper Middle Class join the Workers in Revolt.
In many ways, the recent food increases is the cause of the Arab Spring and the problems in Egypt , for it is the driving force not Twitter or Facebook, for most of the bottom 60% have a weak hold in electricity let alone computers and electronic devices. Computers and Electronic devices are common among the top 40% of the population, thus we are getting a lot of reports in Computers, given the economic situation that means we are NOT getting information on what the lower 60% of the Economy are thinking. Right now, they seem to support Radical Islam but also economic development. We may be seeing the start of a long line of suppression of the lower 60% or just a temporary drop till they take over the country and demand and get radical economic reforms. The radical religious right is presently divided (Just like Radical Left wing tends to be to divided), the key to getting them to work together till economic changes can be done.
Morsi had a problem, he never had the ability to do the radical economic surgery needed in Egypt. He can not confiscate land and redistribute it to the poor. He can not risk losing American Grain Subsidies till such reform is implemented. The top .1% (which includes the Generals of the Egyptian Army) oppose both land reforms and aid to the poor. They oppose increases taxes, for they know the poor can not pay them and thus any taxes has to be put on them. Thus what we are seeing is a coup of the Top .1% to protect they interests and as such no long term solution to the problems of Egypt is possible.
What Egypt needs to a "New Deal" program to protect the lower classes. The top .1% must accept such a program in needed or they will continue to do what they are doing today and that will lead to a Marxist revolution sometime in the Future.
Please note: In many ways the Communist Revolution in Russia in 1917, was never a Marxist revolution, instead you had an over throw of the Government and a movement to eliminate the Petty Middle Class by members of the Petty Middle Class that had embraced Marxism. Lenin believe he could take over Russia and lead the population to Communism, even if that was a rejection of Marxist dogma at the time. This dispute over dogma is why the rest of the Communist Revolutions of 1917-1919 (Germany, Hungary and Austria) all failed while Russia's succeeded. This Communism in one Country violated Marxist dogma but became the rule in Russia till the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989 (and by that time had become more a dogma everyone stated they observed, but then violated it in real life).
As to China's Communist Revolution, that was clearly a traditional Chinese Peasant Revolt, that had replaced prior Emperors (for example when the Ming used a Peasant Revolt to overthrow the Yuan Dynasty set up the Mongols).
In many ways, Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" was his answer to the fear of the Communist revolt in the US. He attacked the top 1% in the form of high 90% tax rates on very high income (FDR then arrange for them to be taxed as long term investments at 45% not the 90% rate). The 90% rate was to take money made due to manipulating the Stock Market to go to the Government not people manipulating the Stock Market. Reagan ended this two tier tax system AND drop the top tax rate to 35%. Thus you were taxed at the same rate, if your income was due to a long term investment that was to make something useful or if you just manipulated the Stock market (or other financial institution). The Bank crisis is a result of this change in Tax Law. Prior to Reagan, banks were hesitate to make short term investments for 90% of the profit went to the Federal Government (while long term investments the bank could keep 55% of the profit). After Reagan, it took a few years, but banks came to see short term investments as preferred, for you are taxed about the same for both but you can get the profits today from short term investments while you have to wait years for profits from Long Term investments,
In many ways a Marxist revolt in the US was killed by the 90% tax rate. IT forced investors into long term investments not a quick profit. Since Reagan, the US has been heading to a Marxist revolution to do the Federal Government's refusal to rein in the rich. The best way to rein in the rich is to re-adopt FDR's method of a 90% top tax rate subject to a 50% disregard for long term investments (50% of 90% is 45%). The US needs to adopt it, so does Egypt in an effort to rein in the top .1%.
