Third Reich and Benchmark year 1928

[Boby]

You will notice that allmost in every book there is allways a comparison with the Weimar year 1928 (or 1929) against the nazi years in the economy, living standards, etc. It is said that judging from this perspective, as opposed to 1932 (the nazi benchmark) they achieved very little, nothing at all or even there was a regression in many areas. So my question: do you think it is fair? Some comments

1928/29 were not "normal" years, but the peak of the so-called Weimar "golden years", financed by massive foreign capital

The military budget was extremely low and there was a boost in imports/exports

The economic policies were different, so was the world economy of the 30s

So i think to take the finance statistics, etc of this year is misleading, as they were largely artificial. Why not 1921? Or 1926? Or an average of 1919 to 1932? I don't think a worker who lived throughout these years will remember if he was much better off in one single year as compared with the years of defeat, revolution, hyperinflation and the depression. After all Weimar lasted 14 years, not one or two.

Comments, additions, corrections are welcome

[Alexander Nasman]

Possibly because the Wall Street Crash of 1929, which sent everything into chaos for the next few years.