Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The German Economy 2.6.41

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The German Economy 2.6.41

    It is clear that Germany needed to expand or die once Hitler had began its reamament program. However, by June 1941 with the fall of Crete, were the conquests made enough for the German economy not to require further growth?

    In other words, did Germany need to attack the SU purely from an economic viewpoint?
    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

  • #2
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
    It is clear that Germany needed to expand or die once Hitler had began its reamament program. However, by June 1941 with the fall of Crete, were the conquests made enough for the German economy not to require further growth?

    In other words, did Germany need to attack the SU purely from an economic viewpoint?
    For doing what?

    If they decided to just hold on to what they got, let the dice fall as they may in Africa, and wait and wait for Britain to propose peace - then they could cut down on the production of tanks and other army equipment. Once they do that, they still need to buy stuff, especially food and oil, from the USSR. And they're in arrears with the payments. And the payments largely are guns, ammunition, military know-how, oilfield tech, the completion of the Lützow... in short, the Germans would be paying their Frühstücke and the fuel needed to wait Britain out by selling the Soviets the rope with which they would eventually be hanged - or at least so Hitler would have seen it.

    If OTOH they chose a one-front war against Britain, they'd need even more foodstuffs and oil. And the rubber from the Far East that was being delivered through a long Transsiberian journey. And the manganese. And...
    Michele

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
      It is clear that Germany needed to expand or die once Hitler had began its reamament program. However, by June 1941 with the fall of Crete, were the conquests made enough for the German economy not to require further growth?

      In other words, did Germany need to attack the SU purely from an economic viewpoint?
      With most of western Europe already in his grasp, Hitler should have perhaps annexed a few more provinces in France, if he needed more German living space to go along with the occupied lands of Denmark, Holland, Poland, Belgium, Czehcolslovakia, Norway, Greece, Albania and Yugoslovia. Had Germany fully consolidated the agricultural, mineral and oil/gas wealth, along with the industrial production capabilities of those aforementioned countries, I can't see why Hitler needed to invade the Soviet Union. Romania and Hungary supplied most of Germany's fuel needs. In the end, there was lots of fertile growing lands and room enough for all to live, except for the Untermenchen Jews, Poles, Slavs, Gypsies and etc.
      Last edited by johnbryan; 07 Nov 12, 16:56.
      "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
        It is clear that Germany needed to expand or die once Hitler had began its reamament program. However, by June 1941 with the fall of Crete, were the conquests made enough for the German economy not to require further growth?

        In other words, did Germany need to attack the SU purely from an economic viewpoint?
        From an economic POV,there was no reason :the occupation of the SU would cost more than the exploitation would yield.Western Europe was bringing more in .
        The economic reasons are a postwar invention from people who had read Das Kapital for the first (and only)time and were thinking they had found the real bible.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
          Had Germany fully consolidated the agricultural, mineral and oil/gas wealth, along with the industrial production capabilities of those aforementioned countries, I can't see why Hitler needed to invade the Soviet Union. Romania and Hungary supplied most of Germany's fuel needs.
          On a peacetime footing, yes. Not while being at war with Britain, though.

          In the end, there was lots of fertile growing lands and room enough for all to live, except for the Untermenchen Poles, Slavs, Gypsies and etc.
          Metropolitan France, Italy and Germany were all running a food deficit. Greece and Yugoslavia plunged into a winter famine that year. Norway needed to import food after its deep-sea fishing areas had gone under British control. The Eastern, least populated, and food-growing areas of both Poland and Romania had just happily joined the USSR. France depended on food imports from its African colonies, which was done on the sufferance of the Royal Navy and it would have ended if Germany had just taken over the formally independent Vichy area.
          Michele

          Comment


          • #6
            That's a great question Nick. Maybe.

            If Germany doesn't attack the U.S.S.R., then there would have been no need to expand the Heer as it had in early 41 and that would have meant that these men would have been available for production and perhaps there would have been different productive output towards more salable business and civilian oriented goods. The U.S.S.R. would still be exporting those foodstuffs and materials that the blockade was causing and, perhaps, Germany would be then have been able to meet it's balance of payments with the Soviets. Germany's armaments focus would have been, IMHO, targeted to air defense, the breaking of the naval blockade and attempting its own naval blockade of the British Isles. It's military aims most likely would have been directed southwards to contesting the Mediterranean, North Africa and the Suez.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
              It is clear that Germany needed to expand or die once Hitler had began its reamament program. However, by June 1941 with the fall of Crete, were the conquests made enough for the German economy not to require further growth?
              By that time, he was allied or had under his control about 285 millions europeans ,
              in order to mismanage such resource it takes a unprecedented level of incompetence.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
                By that time, he was allied or had under his control about 285 millions europeans ,
                in order to mismanage such resource it takes a unprecedented level of incompetence.
                Or a British economic blockade and unwillingness of occupied countries to cooperate.

                I'm out of reach of my Tooze but didn't he wrote that no Barbarossa= continuous decline of German food rations ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  One word Nick:

                  MEFO.

                  Tooze talks at length about the ugly implications for the Reich's finances. These were coming due and the money had to be found, if the industrialists were to be kept on board.

                  The advent of this impending financial crisis dovetails with your chosen timepoint rather nicely.

                  Cheers, Ron
                  48 trips 'round the sun on this sh*tball we call home...and still learning...
                  __________________________________________________ __________________

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The German economy actually took a pretty big hit with the invasion of Russia. Germany was a net importer of raw materials from Russia and the invasion ended those shipments.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      The German economy actually took a pretty big hit with the invasion of Russia. Germany was a net importer of raw materials from Russia and the invasion ended those shipments.
                      Barbarossa was 22nd June, hence the date of 2.6.41 used.
                      How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                      Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gorque View Post
                        That's a great question Nick. Maybe.

                        If Germany doesn't attack the U.S.S.R., then there would have been no need to expand the Heer as it had in early 41 and that would have meant that these men would have been available for production and perhaps there would have been different productive output towards more salable business and civilian oriented goods. The U.S.S.R. would still be exporting those foodstuffs and materials that the blockade was causing and, perhaps, Germany would be then have been able to meet it's balance of payments with the Soviets.
                        Which, as mentioned, means arming the Krasnaya Armiya (guns, explosives, ammunition, combat aircraft, finishing the Lützow were on the list) and providing the USSR with other assorted high-tech stuff and know-how. That may be fine - as long as the USSR also loves peace.
                        Michele

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                          Barbarossa was 22nd June, hence the date of 2.6.41 used.
                          Are we interested in a short time frame assessment ( 2-3 years) or medium term (5 to 10 years ) ?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Michele View Post
                            Metropolitan France, Italy and Germany were all running a food deficit.
                            I think that could have been turned around though. First tank production needed to be switched over to tractor production to get more productivity out of existing farm labour. Second nitrate and phosphate production needed to go to fertilizers and not munitions. That will get per acre yields up. Third the smaller and inefficient farms needed to be merged into larger more productive farms. Although I don't think the political will was there for the last one.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by AdrianE View Post
                              Third the smaller and inefficient farms needed to be merged into larger more productive farms.
                              More productive than what ?
                              according to the data of the league of nations Germany held before the war :
                              -first place in production of meat in Europe
                              -third place in production of wheat in Europe ( after France and Italy)
                              -first place in production of barley in Europe
                              -first place in production of rye in Europe
                              -first place in production of oats in Europe
                              -first place in production of potatoes in Europe
                              -first place in production of sugar in Europe

                              they did not grow much maize ( 1. Romania, 2.Yugoslavia,3 Italy)
                              rice (1. Italy ) , tobacco (1. turkey) wine (france) ...



                              http://digital.library.northwestern....e/le0278ag.pdf

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X