Mao: How Bad was Bad?

[Queequeg]

1) I'm guessing that all of Western and Central Europe combined would have had a higher GDP than the US.
2) The Reich was able to draw on the human resources of the best educated people on the planet.  The KMT ruled over many, many more Chinese people than the Japanese did Japanese people, but the KMT basically destroyed itself butting its head in to the IJA because the leadership and industrial capacity wasn't there.
3) I don't think the US and Canada were "way ahead" of Germany in all respects even in 1928.  Germany had a much larger peasant population, and was substantially less developed than we think of it today, but it was still, as I said, able to draw on a depth of human talent and military tradition that no one else could.  Even some of our best scientists, engineers and artists were exiled Germans.

[Razgovory]

1) I'm guessing that all of Western and Central Europe combined would have had a higher GDP than the US.
2) The Reich was able to draw on the human resources of the best educated people on the planet.  The KMT ruled over many, many more Chinese people than the Japanese did Japanese people, but the KMT basically destroyed itself butting its head in to the IJA because the leadership and industrial capacity wasn't there.
3) I don't think the US and Canada were "way ahead" of Germany in all respects even in 1928.  Germany had a much larger peasant population, and was substantially less developed than we think of it today, but it was still, as I said, able to draw on a depth of human talent and military tradition that no one else could.  Even some of our best scientists, engineers and artists were exiled Germans.

No, the US was away ahead of Germany by 1928.  The US had surpassed both the UK and Germany before WWI and the devastation form those wars set Europe back tremendously.  I remember reading that Germany industrial output in WWII didn't even match the output of Germany in WWI.

[alfred russel]

1) I'm guessing that all of Western and Central Europe combined would have had a higher GDP than the US.
2) The Reich was able to draw on the human resources of the best educated people on the planet.  The KMT ruled over many, many more Chinese people than the Japanese did Japanese people, but the KMT basically destroyed itself butting its head in to the IJA because the leadership and industrial capacity wasn't there.
3) I don't think the US and Canada were "way ahead" of Germany in all respects even in 1928.  Germany had a much larger peasant population, and was substantially less developed than we think of it today, but it was still, as I said, able to draw on a depth of human talent and military tradition that no one else could.  Even some of our best scientists, engineers and artists were exiled Germans.

I was really honing in on the "wealthiest" part.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

The charts here frustrating either leave out the interwar period, or in the chart that includes it, the US.

But in the chart with the US, you can see:

Country                1913       1950
Germany              $3,648    $3,881
Western Europe   $3,457    $4,578
US                        $5,301    $9,561

So in 1913, an average german national would need a 45% increase in purchasing power to equal the average American, and in 1950 246%.

FWIW, using the data in a lower chart, the 1938 value for Germany was $5,528. There isn't an easy way to derive the American value, but you can see the trend in US growth and that is not significantly above where the US was way back in 1913.

[Zanza]

Germany was certainly poorer and had less human capital than the US at its foundation in 1870 and ever after. How is that even a question...?

[Zanza]

I remember reading that Germany industrial output in WWII didn't even match the output of Germany in WWI.

I doubt that. Industry was considerably more developed and Germany did not use tens of millions of slaves in WW1 to support its industry.

[The Minsky Moment]

In 1950 US GDP was greater than all of Western Europe (including Germany, Austria, Med, Scandinavia, etc) combined. 

[The Minsky Moment]

1928: per capita GDP in Germany was 4090 in 1990 dollars, putting Germany behind France, UK, Benelux, Denmark.

US was at 6569, i.e. more than 50% greater.

[grumbler]

In 1950 US GDP was greater than all of Western Europe (including Germany, Austria, Med, Scandinavia, etc) combined.

Queeq says you are wrong, and by a "wide margin."  I'll believe the guy who is so adamant.

[Admiral Yi]

In 1945 US GDP was equal to the rest of the world combined.

[Eddie Teach]

So what went wrong? 

[dps]

So what went wrong? 

LBJ

[Admiral Yi]

So what went wrong? 

The bombed out countries got better.

[alfred russel]

So what went wrong? 

The Rosenbergs.

[Razgovory]

I remember reading that Germany industrial output in WWII didn't even match the output of Germany in WWI.

I doubt that. Industry was considerably more developed and Germany did not use tens of millions of slaves in WW1 to support its industry.

It was run by incompetents though and didn't go into full war production until 1943.

[Queequeg]

In 1950 US GDP was greater than all of Western Europe (including Germany, Austria, Med, Scandinavia, etc) combined.

That's after the war.  I'd bet the numbers look a bit more similar in 1940.