[notfromhere]

Sweden has 10 million people, Egypt has 100 million.

Egypt doesn't have the resources or space to grow to a Swedish standard of living.

[beat]

Egypt's per capita income grew over 20x from 1965 to 2015. And consider the population increase that happened over the same period. The overall GDP (constant US dollars) grew from $5B to around $335B.

Don't give me that "They can't do it" nonsense.

[notfromhere]

It's a water-scarce country that is the seventh largest food importer; much of the population lives in the Nile delta.

Swedes have a huge country and increased from a very small population to a relatively small population.

The resource constraints are different; you can't have infinite growth in every country.

[beat]

Singapore?

[jessaustin]

Egypt is the cradle of civilization. The Nile hasn't gone anywhere. As soon as they get their heads out their asses and let farmers own farms rather than military cronies, they'll be able to feed themselves again.

[notfromhere]

cradle of civilization doesn't have much to do with resource constraints or the realities of Egypt's ability to reach a Swedish level of consumption.

[jessaustin]

No, see, "cradle of civilization" is exactly about resource constraints. They have water and sunlight and good soil, and those are the resources needed for agriculture. People living in Egypt and running short on grain is a temporary condition that condemns their government not a permanent one that condemns their land.