Saudi arabia spends 500 billion dollars for a FULLY tech based city

[Git gud]

1 hour ago, JoeyDM said:

And women still aren't even close to equals.

 

Ex/

• Male guardianship. What fucking moron thought that made any sense? It's ownership.
• Namus. The whole fucking concept.
• Everything about the Hijab is just wrong, and the result of an oppressive/repressive church being so intertwined with a government. It's still a law-defined dress code for women.
• The whole ridiculous cultural concept of "female purity" and the separation of genders for basically any social events.
• Men must swear for women in a court of law.
• Requiring male written permission before being allowed to travel alone.
• The testimony of one man equals one woman in a court.
• Polygamy is legal but polyandry is definitely not.
• Child marriage. Need I say anything more?
• Rape victims can be punished along-side the rapist. "She provoked the attack by wearing revealing clothes, punish her too!

 

Hopefully the coming decades will be very kind to women and gay people there. I'm hoping they will see actual equality in the next 30 years. It might honestly get worse though, as Saudi Arabia falls into poverty when oil starts eventually going down the drain.

 

The ideal scenario is that this new city actually comes to fruition (although that budget isn't enough for what they're proposing) and in 50 years it's an important cultural and economic benchmark for the rest of the world with equal rights for everyone. But seeing how it is today, that just seems unlikely.

According to my Saudi friend, it's a society problem rather than governmental-political 

All the mockings and aggressive words against Muslim states and that they are way too behind are juat from society.

And he also said that the people would start a civil war against them if they did all the changes at once and they need to take it step-by-step.

[Unhelpful]

17 minutes ago, Git gud said:

According to my Saudi friend, it's a society problem rather than governmental-political 

All the mockings and aggressive words against Muslim states and that they are way too behind are juat from society.

And he also said that the people would start a civil war against them if they did all the changes at once and they need to take it step-by-step.

I'm trying to understand your meaning, do you mean to say that there isn't actually an issue, and it's just society claiming that there is? Or do you mean the issues that currently exist stem from the society, rather than the government?

 

A country that is heavily intertwined with a religion is just an awful idea, and Saudi Arabia is a fantastic example of that. The more oppressive of a religion it is, the worse quality of life for people who don't fit the mold.

 

I agree 100%, changes like that overnight would be catastrophic. It just makes me sad that it ever got to the point that it is currently at, it's stuck in the 1400's with the technology of today.

[Curufinwe_wins]

23 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

Snip

Just remember that Christianity  (or rather religion in general) basically rules the roost of the US as well. 

 

In fact there are 7 states that explicitly prohibit Atheists from holding office.

 

(North Carolina, Arkansas, Maryland, Mississipi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas)

 

That's fucked up.

 

And yes I don't want to falsely conflate things and say that the Saudi situation is good. It isn't. It's pretty awful. But the point the other person was making that government reflects the bigotry of the people (at least in part) and if you try to change too much too fast that is how you get Civil War (America is another 'strong' example there).

[Unhelpful]

6 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Just remember that Christianity  (or rather religion in general) basically rules the roost of the US as well. 

 

In fact there are 7 states that explicitly prohibit Atheists from holding office.

 

(North Carolina, Arkansas, Maryland, Mississipi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas)

 

That's fucked up.

 

And yes I don't want to falsely conflate things and say that the Saudi situation is good. It isn't. It's pretty awful. But the point the other person was making that government reflects the bigotry of the people (at least in part) and if you try to change too much too fast that is how you get Civil War (American is another good example there).

That's absolutely fucked up. Let's make one thing clear, I'm not against any specific religion. I'm against things that go against my world view, and I'm against oppressing other people. I'm not some "Hurr hurr Muslims are evil" Trump moron. I'm just against oppression, especially where it's currently most abundant (gender and sexual orientation). I'm also strongly for the separation of church and state.

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

That's absolutely fucked up. Let's make one thing clear, I'm not against any specific religion. I'm against things that go against my world view, and I'm against oppressing other people. I'm not some "Hurr hurr Muslims are evil" Trump moron. I'm just against oppression, especially where it's currently most abundant (gender and sexual orientation). I'm also strongly for the separation of church and state.

All good)

[Git gud]

24 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

I'm trying to understand your meaning, do you mean to say that there isn't actually an issue, and it's just society claiming that there is? Or do you mean the issues that currently exist stem from the society, rather than the government?

 

A country that is heavily intertwined with a religion is just an awful idea, and Saudi Arabia is a fantastic example of that. The more oppressive of a religion it is, the worse quality of life for people who don't fit the mold.

 

I agree 100%, changes like that overnight would be catastrophic. It just makes me sad that it ever got to the point that it is currently at, it's stuck in the 1400's with the technology of today.

1- yes, extremist and outdated thoughts plague the middle east. Not only Saudi Arabia. And the Saudi society and extremist ideals relate to how smoking cause lung cancer.

2-i agree, a state absolutely ruled by a single religion cause high tensions between the population and the goverment.

[Unhelpful]

52 minutes ago, Git gud said:

1- yes, extremist and outdated thoughts plague the middle east. Not only Saudi Arabia. And the Saudi society and extremist ideals relate to how smoking cause lung cancer.

2-i agree, a state absolutely ruled by a single religion cause high tensions between the population and the goverment.

Yes I'm sorry, I didn't meant to target Saudi Arabia in particular. I targeted it because it is the point of discussion in this thread. I could rehash this same rant to any government that is heavily intertwined with an oppressive religion. The only thing that changes in that discussion are the degrees of extremism, oppression, and local acceptance.

 

The issue with it is that most religions heavily favor a certain population, I.E. Islam heavily favors straight Islamic men and is oppressive or abusive towards basically everyone else. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints heavily favors straight white men, and is oppressive and repressive towards everyone else. So when an oppressive and/or repressive religion has a massive bloody claw tightly-gripped around the heart of a government, you end up with an oppressive government that is very friendly to the ruling/favorable demographic.

 

The issue with a religious government is that specific religions tend to heavily favor certain mass populations. I.E. Heterosexual men. And many of those people that it's favorable to will end up defending it to the death, because their lives are so comfortable thanks to the church and it's easy to not notice the discomfort and abuse of others, especially if you grew up with it around you and it just seems normal.

 

This is one of the reasons I hate the state of Utah. Fuck Utah. Fuck every government, nation, state, and region that is heavily intertwined with a religion.

 

@Curufinwe_wins this post should clear up more of my mindset.

 

And for clarification, I'm a straight white man. I'm one of the people in the world least negatively impacted by religions. It's just crazy to see this shit, and to know people who it impacts.

[paddy-stone]

Just got to say this. People saying about starving people should know about some people in the UK, that because of the government stopping their benefit are/have starved. One man in particular, a very ill man had his benefit stopped as he was deemed "fit to work" actually starved to death as he had no way of getting an income as he was so ill... this is what is happening right now in our "wealthy" countries, and if we continue to let this happen then more will follow. I'm not undermining the poverty and starvation that's happening in other countries, just pointing out that this can happen even in our so called first world/civilized countries.

 

Back on topic, this is a fad for sure, and will almost certainly fail... but in doing so they might find solutions to some problems with sustainability maybe.

[Guest]

You need to be exceptionally gifted and intelligent to join this city - country?

 

Well i suppose they have a point in that, wouldn't want some lunatics trying to destroy those lavish urban gardens and pristine landscapes and beaches\coral reefs. Or trying to steal supplies from said farms (hopefully they won't cut in quality when it comes to security indeed).

 

I find it interesting that some believe 500 billion $ is not sufficient tough.

[dizmo]

42 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Of all countries, Saudi Arabia...? 

Money may not be an end all answer, but sure as hell is a good start. 

Not really. 500 billion really doesn't go far. That's only $10,000 for 50 million people. You can blow through that awfully fast. Saudi Arabia pretty much has oil. Once that runs out, they're screwed. They need to diversify. 

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, huilun02 said:

Shame on them, shame on you

Truth hurts. 

[Git gud]

5 hours ago, dizmo said:

Not really. 500 billion really doesn't go far. That's only $10,000 for 50 million people. You can blow through that awfully fast. Saudi Arabia pretty much has oil. Once that runs out, they're screwed. They need to diversify. 

I'm pretty sure they meant 500 billion for buildings,projects,etc

[Foxxer]

Saudi has young leadership. 

So much things will change, to good that is. 

 

Some comments here just makes me laugh. 

[Dredgy]

On 27/10/2017 at 9:05 PM, Dan Castellaneta said:

Maybe Saudi Arabia should work on other things, like women's rights and many other things?

They’ll get there eventually. Given the recent battering to Saudi economy, they’ve realised that it is dangerous to have half the population not being able to get out and contribute to the economy 100%. 

 

They HAVE to diversify from oil - which means they have to open up to the rest of the world, which means they will have to liberalise to a degree. While I don’t see this city as ever coming to full fruition, it at least indicates the government knows they have to attract foreign businesses and invest in its own people to export services rather than oil.

 

Saudi has tonnes of investment overseas - but not as well diversified or well managed as Qatar’s, and Saudi itself is a long way from having an attractive world city a la Dubai. They should have taken steps to rectify this decades ago, and hopefully it’s not too late for them now.

 

[CTR640]

Sorry Apple, you're poor. You should quadrupple your iPhone X prices.

[PlayStation 2]

On 10/27/2017 at 6:28 PM, Goku-sama said:

You need to be exceptionally gifted and intelligent to join this city - country?

 

Well i suppose they have a point in that, wouldn't want some lunatics trying to destroy those lavish urban gardens and pristine landscapes and beaches\coral reefs. Or trying to steal supplies from said farms (hopefully they won't cut in quality when it comes to security indeed).

 

I find it interesting that some believe 500 billion $ is not sufficient tough.

That's code for "you need to be in bed with them to join."

i.e. George W. Bush and Barack Obama

[mr moose]

On 10/28/2017 at 8:15 AM, JoeyDM said:

 

And for clarification, I'm a straight white man. I'm one of the people in the world least negatively impacted by religions. It's just crazy to see this shit, and to know people who it impacts.

 

I am religious, I don't care if you are straight, gay, black, yellow or something in between.  In fact many people I know don't care. It's not part of our belief system, it's something we can't justify with the bible etc etc etc.

 

 

[Unhelpful]

43 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

I am religious, I don't care if you are straight, gay, black, yellow or something in between.  In fact many people I know don't care. It's not part of our belief system, it's something we can't justify with the bible etc etc etc.

 

 

1. Depends on your religion. They are not all equal.

2. Most people are "religious" I.E. people 80 years ago would have claimed that people today were going to hell. People today are very casually religious compared to even a few decades ago.

3. I agree. But people sure try to.

4. I have no problem with religion. I have a problem with religion having any impact of government. Even the slightest impact is harmful.

[PocketNerd]

On 10/27/2017 at 8:35 AM, Dan Castellaneta said:

Maybe Saudi Arabia should work on other things, like women's rights and many other things?

Why not both/all?

[Jito463]

On 10/30/2017 at 2:36 PM, Dan Castellaneta said:

That's code for "you need to be in bed with them to join."

i.e. George W. Bush and Barack Obama

Figuratively.....or literally? 

 

 

 

On 10/30/2017 at 4:20 PM, JoeyDM said:

4. I have no problem with religion. I have a problem with religion having any impact of government. Even the slightest impact is harmful.

So how do you prevent that?  People will inherently act based on their beliefs, so anyone who gets into a political office that has any religious convictions (especially strong ones) will base their actions in office upon those convictions.  Do you think that anyone with religious convictions should be banned from politics?  Should then only atheists be allowed?  Of course, then you have to deal with the horrors that atheists in power have unleashed in the world (communism is responsible for more deaths than any religion in history, even Islam).

[Unhelpful]

52 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

So how do you prevent that?  People will inherently act based on their beliefs, so anyone who gets into a political office that has any religious convictions (especially strong ones) will base their actions in office upon those convictions.  Do you think that anyone with religious convictions should be banned from politics?  Should then only atheists be allowed?  Of course, then you have to deal with the horrors that atheists in power have unleashed in the world (communism is responsible for more deaths than any religion in history, even Islam).

Excellent point, and no I never even began to think that. I'm just referring to true intermingling beyond individual peoples' beliefs. I.E. Official state religions. You're right, true separation is impossible due to people being impacted by their beliefs, but there are ways to avoid or reduce a stranglehold.

[PlayStation 2]

55 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Figuratively.....or literally? 

Figuratively.

I think literally would get you killed. :^)

[System Error Message]

meanwhile the rest of the world starves and suffers because saudi arabia refuses to do its part to take in refugees despite them being closer and having the resources for it with tents already set up just waiting empty.

 

To call saudi arabia a muslim country would be a big lie.