Nazi Germany's excellent economy.

Why did Germany prosper from 1933 up until Germany began to be bombed.

Now that's strange.
As far as I know the only thing that prospered was the military.

>>2
read a history book
Hitler built infrastructure in all areas of the nation and unemployment hit almost 0%

>>3
he achieved it through forced labour and it has nothing to do with economy
all socialist countries have or rather had an unemployment percentage of 0 because everybody was simply assinged to a job with the help of a random number generator

>>4
so, the economy boomed..well until he printed out too much money

>>5

I think the money printing thing happened before the economic boom.

>>5
you can't say that an economy booms if everything is build on subsidies

The excess printing was after WWI, this was before Hitler came to power. As for when he did come to power, he created a number of corporations under government authority, and these produced wealth. Hitler's form of socialism was a bit different than most others, it's rather like what we have now, wealth is generated because of the existence of these private/public subsidies in large corporations that can still generate real wealth and real products and services, but it stifles competition and was not a just system. Of course, not to say ours is as bad as National Socialism, but the corruptions of the socialist policies of the democrats are bringing us there, whether or not the democrats are even aware of it.

>>8
But at the end of his reign he printed a shitload of money for funds...
Also National Socialism always leads to workers revolutions

>>9
>Also National Socialism always leads to workers revolutions\

you sure?
i'm asking because the only historical expample of National Socialism didn't

>>10
read up on Marxism, an government that always subsides business falls to Communism faster.

I smell commie scum

>>12
not a communist, just know that Marx was a genius

>>11
So Japan must be a communist strong hold... /sarcasm

National Socialism isn't a good thing, just because it can appear to function under the private market doesn't mean it's any less devicive or controlling.

Though, >>13, Marx wasn't a genius. He simply didn't understand the functions of a capitalist society, because no uncorrupted capitalist society existed in his time. He tried to implement a system of government that pitted man against his nature, a good system is one that functions under the natural state of human intent, and that system is Capitalism. Unfortunately there isn't any capitalist system that isn't corrupted by socialism today.

>>11
AN GOVERNMENT!!

>>15
Marx studied economics and philosophy for over 10 years, I think he had a pretty fair view of what capitalism was. Better than your view at any rate.

Marx realized that if this world was to become anything but a shit hole people would have to work together instead of against each others.
These ideas he had in the 1830s, while it has taken the rest of the world almost 2 centuries to realize the same ideas.
(I say this because lately it feels like the left has taken the upper hand in many places)

>>2
>>4
>>5
>>7
These posts embodies the stupidity that makes 4chan /newpol/ the funniest shit on the net! Srsly, u guys need history lessons.

>>15
Your analysis shows that YOU don't understand the functions of a capitalist society, or the history of capitalism itself.  If you actually read Marx you realize that his analysis of capitalisms relationships and workings in society were quite apt--for the brand of capitalism that flourished in his day (the prime example of which was the London markets).

>>16
Oh, so anyone who studies something for 10 years is instantly omniscient? People study theoretical physics for 10 years and still have barely grasped the fundamentals and at least physics is not litterred with corruption and has certainties to work on. Economics and philosophy is an entirely empirical field and in the mid 19th century went side by side with people who still believed in the 4 humours and that cholera was caused by "bad smell". The fact that Marx read a lot of useless dribble doesn't prove anything.

How much of this bullshit are you going to spew out? I'm not going to debate with you if you think this is a contest of how much useless crap you can get me to meticulously explain away, it's childish.

When you are ready to explain how exactly your god marx matches up to modern philosophy and economics I'll respond.

>>19
Marx>Adam Smith

>>19
Obviously doesn't know how big of an influence Karl Marx was on the world and history.

... huge government spending motherfucker, do you do it?




hitler did.

>>20
>>21
-Marx>Adam Smith

Negative influence.

>>20
I loled so hard i think i pissed a little.

Adam smith is the KING of ALL economics, Marxs wouldnt have written piss if it wasnt for Smith.

HEY GUYZ HAWKING>NEWTON AMIRITE

>>24
Hawking may well have come up with calculus and the theory of gravity had it not been discoverred yet.

Marx probably wouldn't have uncoverred the nature of the free market if it hadn't been discoverred. He'd just come up with the usual crazy shit.

commutards are living in the past
everything what marx wrote was based on what he saw in manchester
those times are over for like 200 years and marx was an idiot for not seeing how the city prospered
the poorness came thru immigrants from ireland and eastern europe who wanted their share of the city's wealth

>>1
Because Hitler stopped the Jews from leaching off the German people.

>>24

adam smith wouldn't have written shit if it wasn't for the people who came up with letters. what's your fucking point?

>>26
like most of what is written, you have to account for the historical situation then when attempting to make it applicable today, this especially for political writings.