[anasawad]

It is bad because these policies keep their people in the dark and prevent them from advancing.
In one hand this cause a liability to the investors which does reduce investments, and on the other hand,
when the money runs out or go low, they're literally screwed, which can be seen now with oil prices going lower by
the day, they're going to run out of money within a few years, because their lack of entrepreneurship means they cant subsidize oil money and the low prices are putting them in a place where they cant match their income with their spending.

[roxunreal]

Kuwait, Qatar, UAE...

are salafi

No they are not lol. It's insane to compare the system of Saudi Arabia, which is truly Salafist, with that of other gulf monarchies, where women's rights and freedom of religion are miles away from Saudi. Not every conservative Sunni country is automatically Salafist.

[Ganeshas Rat]

The place is useless. It is only kept afloat by oil. Otherwise it would be the same as africa.

Actually it isn't. In any flight from Europe to Asia or Africa and vice versa you'll probably transfer in the gulf, as it is exactly in the center of the old world. They know it too and try to turn them into a biggest logistical center while there's still oil money.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Just to state the obvious, it's not Salafism that makes them rich.

[Noelnada]

Just to state the obvious, it's not Salafism that makes them rich.

I presume that you don't subscribe to the christian protestant concept of predestination which says in short that if you're rich then it's a sign you are going to heaven because God has chosen you.

[Ganeshas Rat]

Salafism makes them rich.

For example, stupid Westerners spend a lot of time, powers and money to put their women into color clothes, greens, yellow, blues, reds, buy shoes with high heels for them, jewelry etc. Because of that they become weak, spend all their money and finish devastated, empty.

And Sauds, that lions of the desert, eagles of Arabia, winds of the sands, kings of the oil, just simply wrap women into cheap black rags. They save a lot of money and can spend them to buy more interesting things: jaguars, German cars, golden pistols. That's how Salafism makes them rich.

Or an another example. 1. You build the highest skyscraper in the world. 2. You don't build canalization for this skyscraper and hire a thousand of Indians instead. You cheated the reality and gained money again, thanks to Allah, his prophet and the only truthful doctrine.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

I presume that you don't subscribe to the christian protestant concept of predestination which says in short that if you're rich then it's a sign you are going to heaven because God has chosen you.

I would consider this option, had the resources not been there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually think that one of the redeeming qualities of the Gulf States is that they distribution a comparatively large proportion of their countries' wealth to their people. Looking at other resource-rich countries around the world (with the exception of Norway perhaps), this is not really common.

Another quality is their foreign relations re the western world. They have acquired a position where they are relied upon and the west has an interest in keeping the royal houses in power, while they have retained some flexibility and independence to act and support foreign policy goals that are not aligned with (and sometimes even opposed to) those of the west.

Overall, I think that the Gulf states have relatively competent leadership and I'm not sure we should be so keen to see them crumble (which seems to be some kind of consensus here on Pofo). That's not to say that I like them or support their ideology, but it's more a case of the devil you know is preferable.

[roxunreal]

And Sauds, that lions of the desert, eagles of Arabia, winds of the sands, kings of the oil, just simply wrap women into cheap black rags. They save a lot of money and can spend them to buy more interesting things

Nnnnnnope

[GandalfTheGrey]

I agree that the key word is citizen Lightman but I believe we need to expand more on that. There are very few citizens in these countries but this is not because of the way they are treating immigrants. These people would still be rich without the immigrant slavery anyway, these people are so rich because they are so few and the only reason they are so few is because someone gave them the land they occupy and that someone guarantees their safety. These people are not state builders, they could not build the states they did by themselves even if you gave them the instructions, they could not hold their ground against Iran or Turkey and establish themselves as communities, these people have no capabilities to win the land, build a state, to run an economy, to drill for oil or to build whatever they are building, which brings us back to what noelnada said, about sucking the cocks of those who can do these things for them and them being loyal dogs. That is the source of their wealth, they were lucky enough to find themselves on a depopulated area which is rich on minerals but is completely inhospitable to a human anyway. No rational human being would ever dare live there for more than a few days, in places where you cannot breath properly, they happen to live right on top of hell on earth and they are the only ones content enough to put their tents under that smelting lava, europeans would not build cities there even if their lives depended on it, noone in history built cities there ever. All these cities are 30 years old.

The fact that they are so few is another convenience in that no matter how rich they become they are so few that they could never pose a global threat unlike bigger nations with rich resources which are purposely sanctioned for allegedly being hostile regimes, when in fact they are hostile because the bigger fish are hostile to them and they are hostile to them because a big population combined with a successful export of natural resources can pose challenges for the top dogs and that position is exemplified by Iran and Russia most obviously.

Some unfair criticism there that basically amounts to bigotry IMO.

While I'll be the first to criticise the gulf states for the unscrupulous use of foreign labour, credit where credit's due. Take Dubai for example who has managed to transform their economy from nearly 100% oil/gas based to now less than 5% reliant on oil/gas. Similar story for Qatar. These states can't in all honesty be described as relying on others to create their wealth for them - they have been proactive in creating wealth for themselves and planning for long term viability post-oil.

[noemon]

It does and I apologize for it but these were my impressions and the impressions of those who lived there for a certain amount of time.

they have been proactive in creating wealth for themselves and planning for long term viability post-oil.

The have started enclosing their cities externally with air-conditioning at some point they will go full artificial bubble. It's great that these states have started the past decade making good use of their money but I do not believe they have long-term viability because of that reason.
Most of these cities could not and did not exist because they are completely barren and uninhabitable.

[layman]

according Micheal Moore 10% of the US ecomy is Held by Gulf Arabs

Bullshit. I wouldnt be suprised if that ignoramus said it though.

Still waiting for any positive information on saudi, their economy and the quality, innovation and skills of their native population.

PS a couple of the smaller gulf states are quite a bit better.