stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Sept 23, 2022 16:12:14 GMT
Britain bungled the First World War recovery in 1920-1925 for about the same reason everyone else did. She was so busy punishing Germany that she forgot about the free trade with Germany that was 30% of her own foreign economic activity. I know you don't like to hear some truths, but if you try to "manage" an economy instead of adjust to the market forces and realities that result from your tampering, you get 1929 and then 1939.
BZ miletus12, that is an absolutely magnificently concise and insightful paragraph.
I especially admire "If you try to "manage" an economy instead of adjust to the market forces and realities that result from your tampering, you get 1929 and then 1939."
Don't let that go to your head....Kid 
Seriously, I do take some pride in being a member of Lordroel's forum.
Unfortunately as I point out miletus12, is way off target in what actually happened. For instance a) What free trade? Britain was the only country practicing this prior to 1914 and also after WWI until it was finally forced off the idea - which was suicidal in a deeply protectionist world - in 1931.
b) The Crash of 1929 was because there was gross lack of regulation of the financial markets in the US - which happened again at the start of this century and lead directly to 2008. This was world wide because the situation post WWI left the US the dominant financial power and it lacked either the knowledge or will to manage that responsibility properly.
c) Britain wasn't intend on punishing Germany. It was desiring to get some reparations, in part to meet the US demands for repayments even while the US was doing a hell of a lot to aid Germany in preventing reparations at all.
Britain did make some serious mistakes but they were largely in not trying to help their economy recover because the Tories, who ruled for virtually all this time took over the idiot's viewpoint of unthinking free trade and laissez faire that had crippled the Liberals for the previous few decades. The biggest single British error other than this was the choice of going back on the gold standard at the 1914 level which was far, far too high.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Sept 23, 2022 16:14:19 GMT
You really need to learn something about what was going on at the time. As usual your displaying a massive ignorance of what was going on in Britain in this period and I suspect also the US from the tail end of your comments.
, i already have responded to miletus12 regarding this matter, if you find a post of any member is something to much, PM me ore report it.
OK sorry.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 28, 2022 10:18:35 GMT
Senior Chief,
I’m coming in a bit late due to a busy few days at work, but based on my reading and study on the period/issue of the British economy between the wars, I tend more to Steve’s interpretation. On a purely economic/financial level, your description of ‘almost bankrupt’ is fair, but applying concepts to the conduct of states and international + national economy is a slightly different game.
Your general premises are well made and fair, but I do not concur with the extent of the conclusion. Britain was in a bad state in 1920, but not a parlous nor a dangerous one. National debt had skyrocketed through WW1, as you point out in detail, but a large part of this was either domestic or in sterling. The hard currency debts, like the ~800-1000 million owed to Uncle Sugar, were the nastiest ones to service, but that was ~14%. For everything else, there were more options, including printing more money. Inflationary and dangerous, but several steps back from bankrupt.
I loved the inclusion of data in the Vox article on the regional variations of British unemployment. We know that the bottom fell out of shipbuilding worldwide in the 1920s, but the coal and textile issues point to that perennial bugbear of older factories, smaller economies of scale, a divided industry of many (too) small companies and technical/educational issues. What it doesn’t show is that the engine of activity was shifting southwards in new industries and services, which has continued ever since. The extra layer on top of that is the financial shift from the City to Wall Street, detailed by Tooze in The Deluge, which I recommend. Monty Norman going back on gold was the rotten cherry on top of a stale cake.
Having said that, the G3s were affordable and beyond that, there was capacity for 2.5 million a year for the rest of the decade without inordinate changes in performance or policy. A full naval race of 4 ships a year is not structurally impossible, but would need changes as well as causing difficulties in the balance of priorities.
Overall, bankruptcy for a nation means sovereign default. Was Britain close to sovereign default - not being able to pay the bills (the interest on the debt) - in the 1920s and 1930s?
No.
|
|
