What if Egypt was profitable for the British empire?

[Justinian Girgis]

Learning that it was unprofitable was a shock to me. I mean Egypt was able to feed the entire roman empire, then there's all the oil in Sinai and last but not least there's the Suez canal. I mean, I think the British must have done a terrible job in order for Egypt to have been unprofitable.

 

[NotAMyth]

Learning that it was unprofitable was a shock to me. I mean Egypt was able to feed the entire roman empire, then there's all the oil in Sinai and last but not least there's the Suez canal. I mean, I think the British must have done a terrible job in order for Egypt to have been unprofitable.

ugh. Hate to see this argument- I've seen people say the same thing about British India.

Most likely this is based on the fact that the Colonial government made less in tax revenue than it actually spent. The thing is profits in the British Empire (like in any capitalistic society) were generated by individuals and private corporations who would earn money off of the colonial exploitation and pay taxes at Home. This fake-ass narrative also helped convince the British public of the nobility of their mission, and how they were doing more for the half-civilized natives than they were getting back.

 

[HARRY]

Thing is Egypt was a British protectorate not a colony or fully controlled by them. After the anglo-egyptian war of 1882 they pick someone to be king and let them have military bases along the Suez canal to protect it. It would have be the up keep of the bases that would have cost the british government. But it would have been worth to insure smoorh quick trade between the UK & India the jewel of the empire.

 

[naraic]

British people got rich in Egypt and brought the wealth back to the UK. In that terms Egypt was profitable for Britain rather than in terms of direct revenue.

You would need to change the economic model of colonisation to make it profitable in terms of direct revenue.

 

[Justinian Girgis]

You would need to change the economic model of colonisation to make it profitable in terms of direct revenue.

ok, What if the economic model was different?

 

[naraic]

ok, What if the economic model was different?

Well a British civil service raising British taxes instead of a protectorate might be an option.

Or when Britain occupied Egypt due to a rebellion against the legitimate government the rebellion was nationalising foreign owned assets.

The owners of a lot of these assets were selling these assets for about a shilling on the pound (roughly 5% value). While it probably couldn't have been done had someone entered the market on behalf of the British government and bought up 50 million pounds of European assets in Egypt after the occupation run those assets as a British sovereign wealth fund providing a return to the state there would have been British profits.

Perhaps forcing the khedive to sign a bill agreeing to pay a billion pounds for British forces putting down the rebellion. Then collecting bit by bit over a hundred years of occupation.

None of the above are very likely to work well but they are options to change the way the british presence works economically.

Also i don't think that British income from the Suez canal was considered income from the occupation. Instead it was considered income from purchasing shares in the canal a while before occupying Egypt.