Different German Oil Strategy

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 13:09

Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 12:09
ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 10:10
Comparison with Britain or Belgium is totally irrelevant .
Context is never irrelevant, you refered to meat consumption, German meat consumption during the war was kept up by taking it from occuppied nations, and consuming it at home. For the military, half of their meat ration came from direct confiscation of the nation they were in and consumed there to ease the logistiocal burden of supply.
ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 10:10
Their economies were different .
Which is why context is required, in 1936 50% of Germans lived below the official poverty line.

Low countries economy once occuppied was subordinated to that of the Reich, the food they would have eaten was consumed by Germans instead.
ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 10:10
The reality is that in 1938 the food situation in Germany was better than in 1932, and this was the main reason why the German population supported Hitler .The Germans did not care if they had only 75 % of the food the British population had ,
Except it was not.

It imported food as it was food deficit nation. What had changed was that their was increased income to purchase it.There was refigeration in most homes ( state gave everyone a home, and you payed back the cost depending on how many children you had, and if your wife gave up working, by 4 children the house became a gift of the state) to store it for longer, hence Tooze moves state expenditure on refrigeration/canning to the military sector as the Reich invested massively in stockpiling frozen/tinned foodstuffs, to replace imports lost in case of blockade, and setting up civilian infrastructure to consume less food due to decreased wastage.

German Life expetency fell between 32 and 37.

Kershaw "A summary of price and wage levels prepared for Hitler on 4 September 1935 showed almost half of the German work-force earning gross wages of 18 ReichMarks or less per week. This was substantially below the poverty line...Wages, then, remained at the 1932 level--substantially lower than the last pre-Depression year of 1928 in the much-maligned Weimar Republic. Food prices, on the other hand, had risen officially by 8 per cent since 1933. Overall living costs were higher by 5.4 per cent. Official rates did not, however, tell the whole tale. Increases of 33, 50, and even 150 per cent had been reported for some foodstuffs. By late summer, the terms `food crisis' and `provisions crisis' were in common use."

Annual food consumption in 1937 had fallen for wheat bread, meat, bacon, milk, eggs, fish vegetables, sugar, tropical fruit and beer compared to the 1927 figures. The only increase was in rye bread, cheese and potatoes.

Kilo of bacon cost 2.5rm
kilo of butter 3 rm.

1933 State had 937 million in gold reserves, in 1937 72 million.

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 10:10
About Klein : you don.t get it : I cited him because he belonged to the USSBS gang,and because after the war he gave wrong informations about the German war economy . What he said was wrong .
Tooze disagreed with Klein and with the USSBS .
I totaly get that your views are shaped by your ideology. What Klien said was based on Wagenführ statistics and he argued that 1939 9% on military expenditure ment AH was prepared for short wars, not long nutritional ones, Tooze used 17% for the same period and argued AH was prepared for long attrition wars.

Now if you had given klien Toozes numbers you would get a different explanation of what they meant from him. Each is counting things radically different from each other.

Wagenfuhr/Tooze in comparison of Military share of industrial production.
1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944
9 16 15 22 31 40
Tooze
17 24 30 34 38 43
1) Schacht was wrong if he said to Goering that the official policy would deprive the population of butter for their bread , because the population did not use butter for its bread : butter was in Germany before WWII a luxury, as it was in Belgium, Britain and most other countries .But Schacht,who belonged to the wealthy classes, did not know how the average German was living .
2 ) About the military share of industrial production : Tooze is right and Wagenführ is wrong
3) That the living condition of the average German was worse than during the depression is false and ridiculous : if it was true, the nazi regime would collaps .
4) The slogan : guns instead of butter is
meaningless ,because less guns would not mean more butter,and more guns does not mean less butter .
wrong, because there were more guns and more butter : the amount of fat that was produced domestically was 53% of the demand of the industry and population in 1933/1934,while it was 57 % in 1938/1939 .
There is no proof for a correlation of the production of guns with the production of butter .The production/import of butter would only increase/decrease if the demand was higher /lower .
The slogan was only an attempt to convince the population/ industry to consume less fat,and, as we don't know how much was consumed by the population compared to the industry and as we don't know how much the industry could decrease its consumption,the obvious conclusion is that the slogan was only an empty slogan, as most slogans are and we don't know if the slogan was successful or not .Was the consumption of fat decreasing ?

Boby
Member
Posts: 2656
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Boby » 20 Jan 2019 13:26

Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:03
Boby wrote:
20 Jan 2019 12:57
Kershaw is using 1934 data. How about 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939?

You are ridiculous.
Asked and answered.
Where????? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 13:29

Boby wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:26
Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:03
Boby wrote:
20 Jan 2019 12:57
Kershaw is using 1934 data. How about 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939?

You are ridiculous.
Asked and answered.
Where????? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
See post 214, first sentence.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 13:44

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:09
1) Schacht was wrong if he said to Goering that the official policy would deprive the population of butter for their bread , because the population did not use butter for its bread : butter was in Germany before WWII a luxury, as it was in Belgium, Britain and most other countries .But Schacht,who belonged to the wealthy classes, did not know how the average German was living .
Except Butterbrot was staple food of the working class. Costing the Reich 550 million to import in 1936 to meet consumption, and money Goring wanted to spend somewhere else. Your right, someone does not know how the Germans ate and what it cost them to do so, around 45% of income, in the 30s.

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:09
2 ) About the military share of industrial production : Tooze is right and Wagenführ is wrong
Tooze uses and accepts production numbers from Harrison, kindly explain how Toozes military expenditure imputs, correlates to those production numbers, being as they indicate a vastly greater expenditure to obtain the same outputs.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 16:21

Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:44

. Your right, someone does not know how the Germans ate and what it cost them to do so, around 45% of income, in the 30s.

Proof ?
In 1927/1928 ,it was
Blue Collar :< 2500 RM :48 %,> 4300 RM 42%
White Collar :< 3000 RM 42 %,> 6000 RM 28 %
Civil Servants : < 3000 RM $# %, > 10000 RM , 22 %
AND, farmers are not included .
Besides, if it was 45 %, this means that people were eating butter only exceptionally .
Til 20 years after the war, butter was for the rich, and not only in Germany .

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 16:31

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:21
Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:44

. Your right, someone does not know how the Germans ate and what it cost them to do so, around 45% of income, in the 30s.
Proof ?
Tooze/Kershaw, using the Nazis own statistics are your proof.

Quantity of consumption per capita Germany second highest in Europe at 16lbs a head, Uk highest in Europe at 24lbs a head for fiscal year 1938.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=OeY ... 36&f=false


Tooze uses and accepts production numbers from Harrison, kindly explain how Toozes military expenditure imputs, correlates to those production numbers, being as they indicate a vastly greater expenditure to obtain the same outputs.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 16:47

There were /are 2 theories about the German economy :
1) From September 1939 til February 1942, Germany had a peace economy, because Hitler did not dare to ask the German people the needed sacrifices for the war . THis theory was very popular in Britain, where people boasted that they accepted the needed sacrfices imposed by Churchill, while the Germans were too weak .
This theory has been proved to be a fable, an invention and a lie,spread by Speer and his henchman Wagenführ and by the USSBS .
2 )The other theory (also spread by the USSBS ) is that Germany had already a war economy before the war.This is also a lot of nonsense,because no one has been able to give a generally accepted definition of a war economy .The % of the GDP spent on armaments is not indicating if an economy is a war or peace economy :in 1939 Germany spent 23 % of its GDP on armament, and Britain 22% ,but no one is saying that Britain had a war economy in 1939 .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 16:57

Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:31
ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:21
Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 13:44

. Your right, someone does not know how the Germans ate and what it cost them to do so, around 45% of income, in the 30s.
Proof ?
Tooze/Kershaw, using the Nazis own statistics are your proof.

Quantity of consumption per capita Germany second highest in Europe at 16lbs a head, Uk highest in Europe at 24lbs a head for fiscal year 1938.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=OeY ... 36&f=false


Wrong answer : I asked for a proof for your claim that the average German spent 43 % of its income on food, not for a claim by a NZ politician that the average German was eating 16 lb of butter per year .
Besides : how would Walter Nash know about the German butter consumption ?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 17:04

And, about the claim that 50 % of the Germans lived in poverty and that they had less food than in Weimar, an other opinion : ''The assets of the economic and social policies of the regime were the reduction of employment and the enhancement of the living standard .''
Source : Verführung und Gewalt :Deutschland 1933-1945 P 511 by Hans-Ulrich Thamer .

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 17:15

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:57

Wrong answer : I asked for a proof for your claim that the average German spent 43 % of its income on food, not for a claim by a NZ politician that the average German was eating 16 lb of butter per year .
Besides : how would Walter Nash know about the German butter consumption ?
Because he was as aware of the facts in 1937. You dont like the answer to your question, because it shows how uniformed you are about the subject matter.

Why not read the authors you quote?
In 1939 the Reich Statistics Office and the German Labor Front published the results of a joint study on the standard of living of the German worker the survey found that nearly forty-three percent of a worker’s income went to food.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 17:16

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 17:04
And, about the claim that 50 % of the Germans lived in poverty and that they had less food than in Weimar, an other opinion : ''The assets of the economic and social policies of the regime were the reduction of employment and the enhancement of the living standard .''
Source : Verführung und Gewalt :Deutschland 1933-1945 P 511 by Hans-Ulrich Thamer .
No its Reich statistic.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Hanny
Banned
Posts: 855
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Hanny » 20 Jan 2019 17:19

ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:47
There were /are 2 theories about the German economy :
1) From September 1939 til February 1942, Germany had a peace economy, because Hitler did not dare to ask the German people the needed sacrifices for the war . THis theory was very popular in Britain, where people boasted that they accepted the needed sacrfices imposed by Churchill, while the Germans were too weak .
This theory has been proved to be a fable, an invention and a lie,spread by Speer and his henchman Wagenführ and by the USSBS .
2 )The other theory (also spread by the USSBS ) is that Germany had already a war economy before the war.This is also a lot of nonsense,because no one has been able to give a generally accepted definition of a war economy .The % of the GDP spent on armaments is not indicating if an economy is a war or peace economy :in 1939 Germany spent 23 % of its GDP on armament, and Britain 22% ,but no one is saying that Britain had a war economy in 1939 .
Wow, i mean, just wow.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Boby
Member
Posts: 2656
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Boby » 20 Jan 2019 17:38

As for the 43% on food claim, same figure here:
https://www.digizeitschriften.de/dms/im ... 41%7Clog43

From a sample on 2.496 worker families

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12038
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2019 19:39

Hanny wrote:
20 Jan 2019 17:15
ljadw wrote:
20 Jan 2019 16:57

Wrong answer : I asked for a proof for your claim that the average German spent 43 % of its income on food, not for a claim by a NZ politician that the average German was eating 16 lb of butter per year .
Besides : how would Walter Nash know about the German butter consumption ?
Because he was as aware of the facts in 1937. You dont like the answer to your question, because it shows how uniformed you are about the subject matter.

Why not read the authors you quote?
In 1939 the Reich Statistics Office and the German Labor Front published the results of a joint study on the standard of living of the German worker the survey found that nearly forty-three percent of a worker’s income went to food.
First,you said that it was 45 % for the Germans, now you are saying that it was 43 % for workers .
There is a big difference between both .
Besides, what are workers ? Are farmers included ?And self-employed people ?
About the butter consumption : if it was 16 lb = 8kg, it proves my point that butter was a luxury .
If you disagree with my claim that butter was a luxury , you must than admit that the regime had succeeded to enhance the living standard of the population, something that debunks the theory that Germany had already a war economy before the war .
I am still waiting on a proof for the butter consumption in Germany , and, Walter Nash is not a proof .

Boby
Member
Posts: 2656
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Different German Oil Strategy

Post by Boby » 20 Jan 2019 20:15

Official figures are well-known
http://www.digizeitschriften.de/dms/img ... ys489#navi

1932 = 7,5
1933 = 7,8
1934 = 7,8
1935 = 7,8
1936 = 8,5
1937 = 8,9
1938 = 8,8
1939 = 9,2

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”