i think that the increase on returns is easily explained by tech advancements and longer working hours due to war probably

>hitlers economy was capitalist
Even though it wasnt...
Okay

no thats not what i said

i said he pursued an alternative to capital

@M240DualWielder it was interventionist

But still capitalist

Mixed economy

Would be a better term

Hitler didn't nationalize that much stuff though

the ussr was also a state capitalist country
but they obviously intended on becoming communist up until a certain point

They were state socialist

everything was effectively nationalised via the DAF doe @The Desert Fox V

well

practically

@Spergerger regulated but not really nationalised

a distinction without a difference imo but whatev

Regulationism is different

Pretty sure the businesses still chose prices and stuff

yeh yeh ig he could have gone further and such

The window of choosable prices was just narrowed

why i said effectively ofc

But they weren't

Is my point

ofc

where has that commie gone?

Was he a communist m

I thought he was just being strasserist

Or something

i bet hes gonna come back in like 5 mins with a bunch of horror stories about ns german labour rights
and be like '' but they couldnt strike!!!''

Striking is a good revolutionary tool but is bad if you actually want the country to run

Labour courts>striking

he also banned lockouts as well

Good

Did Hitler actually implement labour courts to mediate disputes?

I know he planned to

they had workers council i believe

which are similar

It was a method of evaluated capitalism.

it depends on how profit is being used @Spergerger returns on capital can be used to benefit people or line the wallets of businessmen.

They aren't protecting capitalists if the capital is owned by the state or by a collective

It's a big difference