NatSoc Economics

In practice, their system after 1936 became only a step behind Soviet system. They literally had Four Year Plan and Goering was the master of the economy. He could make laws by decree.
Private initiative was heavily discouraged, big business became entrenched. Workers were represented through one, state-controlled syndicate. Some crucial industries were brought under direct state control (aircraft industry for example), while the rest were supposed to toe the line.
Sale of some goods was restricted, for example motor vehicles.
Big companies/conglomerates were still owned by big industrial families though.
Overall, their system was a perversion. It wasn't capitalist, but it wasn't socialist either. Hitler was a compromiser, and he struck a deal with the rich, betraying the original ideas of his party.
As for how well it worked, it didn't work well. Germany was burning through it's reserves fast, due to unsustainable and massive rearmament and expansion of welfare state. Real wages in Nazi Germany dropped by 1939.
They were saved by appropriating Czech and Austrian gold, but if the war didn't break out before 1941 or 1942, they would probably go bankrupt.

Real National Socialism hasn't been tried.

Let me just point out one incredible lie in those posts: there were no reparations in 1933. Moratorium was put on German reparations in 1931. Furthermore, reparations were NOT crippling at all. German unwillingness to pay them was a purely nationalist/spiteful affair.
Even though Versailles stipulated 132 billion were to be paid in theory, in reality Germany only had to pay 50 billion.
Dawes Plan and Young Plan further eased the burden on Germany. Lausanne Conference of 1932 reduced their burden even more.
Stop lying. Germans imposed on France in 1871 FAR HARSHER conditions, and German troops occupied places in France until French paid.

It didn't. Germany was crippled by debt and had to start the war preemptively so they wouldn't run out of money. Mark was full blown fiat currency and worthless by late 1938. The first 3 countries they've invaded - Poland, Denmark and Norway all had substantial precious metal reserves which allowed Hitler to keep paying for the resources he bought from USSR for a while longer.

The only reason why you keep hearing about Hitler somehow reinvigorating economy is because he was Keynesian. Also know as absolute retard but the powers that are like krynesian economy because it allows them for swindles with government contracts.

And what fucking hyperinflation?
There was no hyperinflation in 30's.
Why are you people so fucking gullible and so unwilling to check the facts for yourself?
There was no Nazi economic miracle. It was just an artificial stabilization of the economy, which was followed by unsustainable spending, most importantly on rearmament.
Are you saying spending more than you can and then starting a devastating conflict is a good thing? That's such a nigger-tier logic. Though not surprising of your kind.

The (((nose))) knows.

Attached: I wonder who's behind this post.jpg (491x491, 40K)

Not an argument. Calling people kikes won't change the realities of Nazi Germany. You're lying. You're acting exactly how you claim Jews are acting.

Muh Jews. Reminder. Vichy France was a proxy so nazis could do business with Rothschilds, with rich jews running wild. Prominent members of Rothschild family were in Vienna after Anschluss happened. Nazis let them out despite being able to just arrest or just disappear them. The only Rothschild that ended up in concentration camp got extra rations and separate house.

Poland, Denmark, Belgium, Norway, the Netherlands and Luxembourg fought crisis via reduced spending and building up gold/silver reserves, Germany was spending fiat currency printed by Rothschild backed central bank.
Germany was allied with Jewish controlled Soviet Union.

youtube.com/watch?v=LYEUHk16yk4
here is some food for thought
"muh third position" is structurally flawed but is better than the economics of Strasser, Keynes and Marx.

Quads for God.
Remembering, a currency system is merely a proxy for what is essentially a barter system.
>I have 50 kilos of potatoes, you have 50 kilos of steel
>I want steel, you want potatoes
>You and I get along, so you trade your steel for my potatoes, we're both happy
>Someone else, who wants steel or potatoes, has carrots.
>You and I don't want carrots
>So he trades them for paper money to someone who does want carrots
>He then has money to trade with me for my potatoes or steel.
>Our currency system works
A currency is only worth the material goods or service it can be backed by. Gold is no good if everyone is starving.

Their economy wasn't really Keynesian. Simply having a high level of government expenditure is far too broad a definition. Keynes advocated for low interest rates during the recovery period, encouraging the marginal propensity to consume and discouraging saving, not implementing price or wage policies in less than full employment, the government letting go after recovery, and ultimately greater consumption and connections with world markets. In Germany interest rates were kept high early on by Schacht, consumption was suppressed and saving encouraged, wages and prices were controlled, the government played an increasingly larger part in the economy from 1936 onwards, and trade and consumption never recovered to Weimar levels.

Take out a bunch of debt, then invade Europe in war to pay it back.

Schaht was the only one with economic sense, and he wasn't even a real Nazi.

Hop-bacco backed currency when?

If they're lies, then how do you explain this?
archive.org/stream/HowHitlerDefiedTheInternationalBankers/HowHitlerDefiedTheBankers_djvu.txt

Attached: 31d30c2ed26325ce8076e54c77df2aadbaef8c1d82bbb1c59abcb52a0329adc7.jpg (255x255, 12K)

>Take out a bunch of debt,
Who lent them the money?

>Dumbass that never read gottfried feder.
The philosophy of national socialism was to abolish interest, and they were able to do it on some things like mortgages for example. The fact is that they had high interest rates was more of a transition thing than anything, the same is with wages and prices controlled. The people were poor after the hyperinflation, they couldn't buy most things and the government was required to change price tags and give higher wages to people to build up the economy and wait for it also to build up consumption. Encouraged saving only became a thing when people started to buy more and farmers couldn't make enough food for them because of bad harvest and once again because of the failure of self sufficiency and autarchy, but of course you wouldn't talk about how during this time the reich doubled or even tripled the production of many things. Not to mention the fact that according to gottfried feder that the state owned companies would be the main source of revenue for the government, instead of taxes on the people, which again would encourage consumption. Trade never reached the same level, because autarchy and self sufficiency dumbass, that's why they were managed to double production in their own country in the long run.
>there was no hyperinflation in 30's
that doesn't mean that the economy wasn't crippled by it and the people weren't. That doesn't change the fact that the nazis made a higher standard of living for the people.
hurr durr hurr durr, look at me i'm smarter than you because i repeat what the mainstream says hurr durr. Even though some historians say that the nazi economy is good and made germany great, but nah let's just repeat the narrative that everything that the nazis did was bad.

Obviously from stealing from jews.

>gottfried feder.
Worth reading his manifesto?

yes

I don't know what provoked this post, I was only contrasting what happened in the Third Reich compared to Keynesian theory. I'll respond to some points though:
>Dumbass that never read gottfried feder.
Why should I read Feder? He seemed to have a lot of far-fetched ideas and economic policy was carried out by Schacht, who honestly knew how to fund an expansion.
>The philosophy of national socialism was to abolish interest
It never happened though.
>and they were able to do it on some things like mortgages for example
I'm only aware of this being done for farm estates.
>The fact is that they had high interest rates was more of a transition thing than anything
They kept it at the same level for the entire prewar period.
>The people were poor after the hyperinflation, they couldn't buy most things
Post-hyperinflation Weimar was actually pretty prosperous and had a 15% higher consumption per head than 1938 with an upward revised cost of living.
>give higher wages
Wages stagnated compared to the late 1920s.
>Encouraged saving only became a thing when people started to buy more and farmers couldn't make enough food for them because of bad harvest
Savings were always encouraged because the government was looking for as many channels as possible to reduce consumption and inflation, and provide more credit for the state owned banking system.
>but of course you wouldn't talk about how during this time the reich doubled or even tripled the production of many things
Why wouldn't I? They did of course bring about a large increase in production, especially in producer and capital goods. Consumer goods are a different story though.
>according to gottfried feder that the state owned companies would be the main source of revenue for the government, instead of taxes on the people, which again would encourage consumption
Once again, I don't really care for Feder since in practice Germany had one of the highest tax rates in northwestern Europe and most firms were private.

Attached: 1497913377995.png (742x442, 64K)

>no mention of Hjalmar Schacht
Without him the German economy would never have recovered and Hitler wouldn't have gone on on his conquests. Hitler went paranoid cuckoo and put Schacht in Dachau, the man that enabled Germany to do what it did in the first place.
NatSocs are not economists, so the thread title is misleading and retarded.