Was Hitler a good economic leader? (Pre-war)

[Chronos]

I find this to be a very interesting subject. I have read articles of some people that no matter how Evil Hitler was and no matter Germanys situation after his war, Hitler was a great economic leader and a "great example of successfull socialism". Some however would argue that considering the depression nothing else than an uprise was possible, but I myself must say that the uprise of pre-war Germany was extraordinary.

Others having said however, that Hitler actually had skyhigh debts in 1939 just before the war, and it was on those depts that he caused the economic upprise, and without the war those debts togheter with the inflation that he caused with his warproduction would have dragged Germany down sooner or later.

And then we have as a great example the autobahn. I have heard sayings that the Autobahn actually wasn't a smart investment at all as Germanys traffic wasn't great enough for the Autobahn to be needed, and the only ones to actually take real advantage of It's competence was the Americans.

I apologise if this title has been brought up earlier.

[konny]

Others having said however, that Hitler actually had skyhigh debts in 1939 just before the war, and it was on those depts that he caused the economic upprise, and without the war those debts togheter with the inflation that he caused with his warproduction would have dragged Germany down sooner or later.

Exact. Thanks to the re-armation programm Germany basically was broken in 1939.

And then we have as a great example the autobahn. I have heard sayings that the Autobahn actually wasn't a smart investment at all as Germanys traffic wasn't great enough for the Autobahn to be needed, and the only ones to actually take real advantage of It's competence was the Americans.

The Autobahn was none of Hitlers achievements. The planning was already done by the earlyer government but not executed due to certain groops in parlament blocking the expenses (that is, the NSDAP had been blocking the same programm it was later praised for).

The same is with uneployment: It was mainly a result of the world economic crisis but already declining on a regular base prior to 1933. The "Reichsarbeitsdienst" that forced unemployed to work, for example, on the Autobahn, eliminated unployment on the paper, but was complete economical nonsense on the other hand: The workers were paid less money than they would had recieved from the public unemployment insurance, and other governmental help. In the same time their "new job" might have prevented them from searching themselves a real work. And the mass labour force the state was using to build these projects prevented regular street building companies from hiring these men to do the job.

The NSDAP, despite having it in its name, was not a socialists party. Any elements that were drifting to the left within that party were soon eleminated after 1933. Hitler was relieing heavly on the major industry companies, and recieved massive support from there. The situation is not to be confused with that in Russia in 1917.

[Xerrop]

Exact. Thanks to the re-armation programm Germany basically was broken in 1939.

And the re-armation wasn´t even very succesful. Only by occupying Czechoslovakia he got enough industrial capacity for his Wehrmacht. Many of the tanks used in the early years of WWII were manufactured from Czech companies like Skoda.

[Dr. Croccer]

No. By 1939 Germany's expenditures were bigger than it's income, most of which due to the gigantic re-armament. Whilst the military Keynesianism of Hitler was quite effective for a while, it wasn't going to last for long. Had he not invaded and looted other countries Germany would've eventually collapsed because of the sheer economic weight of the military.

[The Dutch Devil]

No the jobs he created were the one he stole from Jews, and as stated above he put the country in great debts. Also he pumped millions of Marken in IG Farben and their almost useless synthetic fuel project.

[Ahlerich]

no he wasnt. i would go as far as hitler was germanys obama. lol

[Odovacar]

no he wasnt. i would go as far as hitler was germanys obama. lol

Only..a little bit different....

[AK47]

no he wasnt. i would go as far as hitler was germanys obama. lol

Its interesting you say that because I once had a teacher in highschool who believed Hitler was good with the economy in germany and he happend to be a democrat(the party Obama belongs to).
He taught me about goverments taking care of its people and about the good things of socialism.

[Banana Jelly]

He was actually to be honest good at changing to economy to the right spot. He gave more job's, the economy boosted (More job's going to army), and more people got inspired to work and get there lazy ass off. But soon his spending on only military was too huge to get un-noticed. That's what messed him up.

[intel]

He was actually to be honest good at changing to economy to the right spot. He gave more job's, the economy boosted (More job's going to army), and more people got inspired to work and get there lazy ass off. But soon his spending on only military was too huge to get un-noticed. That's what messed him up.

Well, if boosting economy by going to war for Lebensraum and putting country in debts is sign of a good economic leader...

[Banana Jelly]

Well, if boosting economy by going to war for Lebensraum and putting country in debts is sign of a good economic leader...

Hes talking about pre-war

[Tirus]

He was; he somehow managed to get all germans a job (with projects) and combine it to fix himself an army, weapons and an awesome infrastructure (that is still in use at present).

[intel]

Yes, and precisely that's what I mean. Preparations for war and overspending boosted German economy. That's not really a sign of good economic leader, since without war the economy would collapse painfully.

[Banana Jelly]

Yes, and precisely that's what I mean. Preparations for war and overspending boosted German economy. That's not really a sign of good economic leader, since without war the economy would collapse painfully.

Him preparing for the war had it's good effect's and the down effect's in the economy. The good effect was that more job's inside the army, and more manufacturing, with steel, guns, and all that. While the downside was it war more then he could have handled. It's both a general gray area. While the depression stopped a couple of year's back, and massive unemplyment stopped when he took position as fuhrer, he was considered leading Germany back on it's foots. That was like the 1920's of America, where America grew so rapidly during that period.

[Mangalore]

..., he was considered leading Germany back on it's foots. ....

This is the key phrase. People believed his measures were what turnt everything around but his measures only worked by various decisions no responsible government or politician would have done because they would have to account for dynamics that could easily blow up in your face. Hitler had no economic plan for a prospering German nation. For that his world view was too achaic (aka social darwinsitic seeing territory as the measure of a race's strength and glory. ) => nation needs big club => nation must breed faster.

One just has to look at ridiculous things like Plan Z which proposed a German navy the German admirals would have no clue where to park in the Norh Sea and which consumed so huge amounts of fuel that the German Wehrmacht would have grinded to a halt because there would be barely enough for any one of them to work halfway efficiently. Let alone the idea of these superdreadnaught class battleships of ridiculous dimensions.

[conon394]

One just has to look at ridiculous things like Plan Z which proposed a German navy the German admirals would have no clue where to park in the Norh Sea and which consumed so huge amounts of fuel that the German Wehrmacht would have grinded to a halt because there would be barely enough for any one of them to work halfway efficiently. Let alone the idea of these superdreadnaught class battleships of ridiculous dimensions.

The fact Hitler kept parts of it going and or returned it priority during the war with Russia is even more telling. The eventual navy produced would still be outclassed by the RN let alone the US navy (And vastly so by the one envisioned in the Vinson-Walsh Act).

Hitler should have been focusing on u-boats only, and a hell of lot more aircraft and maybe the thinking about what would happen in the USSR did not collapse so conveniently like France.

[Carach]

had what became the allies implemented financial sanctions (in a way) when he was doing his march through europe pre-war it probably would have stopped hitler in his tracks. much of the nazi higher ups acknowledged this weak spot (due to its rather irresponsible financial practices)

unfortunately people prefered the appeasement route..

the autobahn stuff is a massive myth (triumph of nazi propaganda that lingers to this day?), for reasons already mentioned.
The statistics that the nazis also used to show their massive 'success' in economics with regards to unemployment etc were also doctored..

[Odovacar]

"Retaking" the Ruhr-area though was his own decision and it was economically beneficial.

[konny]

"Retaking" the Ruhr-area though was his own decision and it was economically beneficial.

????

The occupation of the Ruhrgebiet happened between 1923 and 1924, and has nothing to do with Hitler. What Hitler "re-took" was the Rhineland (1936) that was a demilitarized zone (not occupied!) since 1930.

[Odovacar]

????

The occupation of the Ruhrgebiet happened between 1923 and 1924, and has nothing to do with Hitler. What Hitler "re-took" was the Rhineland (1936) that was a demilitarized zone (not occupied!) since 1930.

Yeah I thought of the Rhineland.