The reason for this is that the policies he implemented via the classical textbook and as advocated by such luminaries as Hayek made Germany worse.
The Nazi party went from an asterisk in parliament to dominating it as you can see here
courtesy of Alan Kohler courtesy of Lombard Street.
Friedman thought it mad and Hayek actually said he was wrong around 1936 I think.
Austerity brought on at the wrong time brings disastrous consequences.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHomer, you're back to NAZI economics. It never really went away, did it?
ReplyDeleteBruning was leader of the Nazi party was he?
ReplyDeleteYou fail Homer. You are not intellectually honest enough to openly discuss Keynes, Tooze and economics of Weimar and Nazi Germany.
ReplyDeleteYour position is untenable, ridiculous and bizzare.
The deletion of my post is a black mark against both your cause and your alleged intellect.
I told you to tone down the language, you ignored it.
ReplyDeleteMark, look yourself in the mirror everytime you lack of understanding of this or any other subject you simply swear at people.
That shows a lot
You still won't debate the issue.
ReplyDeleteWhat you call swearing passes on daytime TV and it is a weak excuse and security blanket you can use to run away from criticism of some very stupid ideas you have.
Then debate the issues instead of big noting yourself.
ReplyDeleteyou haven't as yet.
Like I said then.
ReplyDeleteYou fail Homer. It is all in Tooze's book. He notes that the Nazis made Germany worse off, and you have said this is wrong, however, contrary to evidence.
Bruning was not a Nazi. He like the Nazis did not believe or support parliamentary democracy.
ReplyDeleteStick to the subject please or face deletion unless you say someting interesting and I am afraid Mark you never do
Homer
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think that everyone else who has read Tooze believes that he says that the Nazis made Germany worse off, whereas you believe the opposite?
Rather a shame I didn't say that.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't about the topic either which is the worst failure of classical economics ever. Even Hayek recanted but you cannot!
So when the US investors pulled out of Germany, the German Government should have made that up with an equal amount of capital spending on infrastructure?
ReplyDeleteThat's just great. They'd have eight lane roads in country towns and no new capacity in factories or any new investment in the production of labour saving technology.
You would herald that as a success.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteso you support Bruning's policies even though Hayek realised he was wrong.
ReplyDeleteWeak Homer. Please do not remove comments made by those interested in debating economics.
ReplyDelete"so you support Bruning's policies even though Hayek realised he was wrong."
A reference for that, please.
“Although I do not regard deflation as the original cause of a decline in business activity, such a reaction has unquestionably the tendency to induce a process of deflation – to cause what more than 40 years ago I called a ‘secondary deflation’ – the effect of which may be worse, and in the 1930s certainly was worse, than what the original cause of the reaction made necessary, and which has no steering function to perform. I must confess that forty years ago I argued differently. I have since altered my opinion – not about the theoretical explanation of the events, but about the practical possibility of removing the obstacles to the functioning of the system in a particular way” (Hayek 1978: 206).
ReplyDeletewhich is of course
Hayek, F. A. von. 1978. New Studies in Philosophy, Politics, Economics, and the History of Ideas, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Why don't you blokes read?
Germany collapsed because of deflation?
ReplyDeleteSo what should have the response been? Substitute Reich spending for US investment that was being pulled out?
It wasn't to prolong a depression
ReplyDelete