you lied

Source ?

East germany was almost third world by 1990

germany has spent trillions

and to this day east germany is still comparatively backwards

dude

this is getting tiresome

zero sources

consistent lying

you can draw a line across europe of old soviet states

as to this day you can see economic weakness and backwardness caused by socialism

East germany had crumbling infrastructure and 1970s tier factories still producing vacuum tubes

one moment translating

okay

here we go

Before…the Third Reich the East German economy had…per capita national income…103 percent of West Germany, compared to a mere 31 percent in 1991

"Before…the Third Reich the East German economy had…per capita national income…103 percent of West Germany, compared to a mere 31 percent in 1991"

so 103 percent GDP of west germany in 1945

end of ww2

you just said after

so east germany went from having 103 percent GDP

of west germany

to

31 percent

1990

here ill show original source

as its unclear

https://fee.org/articles/comparing-the-economic-growth-of-east-germany-to-west-germany-a-history-lesson/

damn original book in behind pay wall of some sort

those numbers you posted

were garbage

mentioned in link I provided

soviet government provided garbage numbers for estimates

here are the facts june

Here are the facts june

east germany went from being ahead of west germany immediately after the war

to 30 percent of it and backwards

I already provided source on that

The stats I provided were soviet stats

jesus man this is getting sad

here ill post it again

In 1946, the Soviet zone had a slight total factor productivity lead

wartime industrialization had contributed more to the eastern economy, and the destruction caused by the war was lighter than in the west.[4] However, by 1948 the western zones had become more prosperous.[4]

Ritschl, A.; Vonyo, T. (17 April 2014). "The roots of economic failure: what explains East Germany's falling behind between 1945 and 1950?". European Review of Economic History. 18 (2): 166–184. doi:10.1093/ereh/heu004.

https://academic.oup.com/ereh/article-abstract/18/2/166/405398?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Abstract
The relative decline of the East German economy after 1945 has eluded researchers, as several large shocks appeared to have hit it at the same time. In this paper, we revisit the immediate post-war period in both parts of Germany to obtain a more comprehensive picture of the output and productivity shocks operating in both economies. Our principal finding is that the dismantling of the capital stock alone cannot explain the inferior performance of the East German economy. The collapse of output after the war and the ensuing recovery in both parts of the country were driven by total factor productivity; changes in factor endowments were of second-order significance. West Germany began to lead East Germany in industrial labor productivity well before the economic reforms of 1948 could make their mark. The major factor contributing to this early divergence were disproportions in industrial structure caused by the division of Germany.

East germany started out with a lead

and ended up a fraction of west germanys economy

and east germany was the most productive part of the soviet bloc

well it kind of does actually

the birthplace of capitalism

earliest adopters

you could argue east india , parts of africa diversifies capitalism within the world

but that doesnt really help your point

east india is experiencing explosive growth under capitalism

china was a failure until it started embracing certain aspects of capitalism

yes I am not sure why I said east india

but on the original point

you were proven incorrect

east germany had major lead in 1945 and by 1948 west germany pulled well ahead

bruh read beyond the abstract

dislocated ?

these "slave labours" appear to have multiple tvs

a car

a house

the concept that people have to functionally work to exist

due to realities of planet

is not the same as slave labour

well you suggested slave labour

which is clearly not true

June

its over man

the east germany apologetics and lies are just sad

Well yes

Your first claim

was that east german economy was behind west germans after ww2

it wasnt

that was a lie

I have already shown that

Look in the journal man

June read the journal

I provided a source

okay first

This line of research broadly agrees on the comparatively greater importance of post-war dismantling in East Germany. However, there still appears to be no clear consensus on the quantitative impact of these initial conditions, and on why they should have put East Germany on a path of persistent divergence from West Germany. Do relative factor endowments explain output and productivity performance in early post-war Germany? Do differences in factor endowments contribute to explaining why the two German economies evolved so differently after World War II?

This paper argues they do not. Upon careful re-examination of the evidence, we find that while movements in output as well as factor endowments and proportions were substantial, they are only second-order effects. Instead, what dominates the evidence is a combination of dramatic swings in total factor productivity (TFP). One is a veritable collapse in TFP following the breakdown of the German war economy, which we find in both parts of Germany. The other is a divergence between West German and East German TFP levels. The latter turned East German industry from having a non-trivial productivity lead over its western counterpart in 1946 to trailing West German productivity by the late 1940s, and rapidly losing ground.

The war-induced decline of TFP has been noticed in previous research. Sleifer (2006) showed that it had occurred in both East and West between 1936 and 1950. Eichengreen and Ritschl (2009) found that TFP in West Germany all but collapsed at the end of the war and subsequently recovered rapidly. This implies that movements in TFP were the dominant driver of West German economic growth between 1945

Total factor productivity:

also called multi-factor productivity, is usually measured as the ratio of aggregate output (e.g., GDP) to aggregate inputs.

the journal lays out TFP relationship to GDP

and the collapse of east german economy before even 1950

BY

the way

I looked into the source you provided

its as expected BS

dude read your own quotes

1945 onward is soviet control

about to start info dump

Our principal finding is that the dismantling of industrial assets alone cannot explain the inferior growth performance of the East German economy after the war. Instead, the slower growth of TFP in East Germany is by far the dominant explanation. Soviet reparations were crippling, and indeed reduced the capital–labor ratio in industry by approximately a third, as previously suggested. However, a large influx of refugees combined with more substantial wartime destruction in machinery and plant generated a decline in the West German capital–labor ratio as well. The principal source of both the initial decline of industrial production in both parts of post-war Germany and the subsequent divergence between them are changes in TFP rather than shifts in relative factor endowments.

well first june