WI Necker remained finance minister of France

What if Necker remains finance minister. Say he gets rid of his overblown overconfidence and works closely with Mirabeu and Laffayette, say he is still in Louis favour and he passes a series of reforms unnoposed. How plausable is it for the French revoulution to not occur had Necker remained. Is it impossible for him to succeed or can he avert the French rev. Does anyone know

Necker is a little too late to save France. French debts go back to the Seven Years War that began to cripple the nation, and you trace back structural problems of the French monarchy back to the War of the Spanish Succession, which burden France with a large amount of debt that she was able to shed when the South Sea Bubble burst in the 1720s. I'm not sure if working with Mirabeau or Lafayette would help much: indeed, Lafayette was a nation hero but prior to 1789 really had no political role.

I think primarily to save France in the later part of the 18th century you'd have to avoid them getting into the American Revolution on the colonists side: Necker paid for the war through loans with high interest rates, rather than raising taxes. He also used loans to help balance the budget. At least in the short term, this is what helped drive up France's debt.

One of the problems with Necker, you had the reverse situation; the conservatives didn't like the man because he was a commoner, a foreigner and a protestant. His being otherwise an overconfident and at times difficult to work with man above this led to the additional problem that he was very very fragile as minister of finances (he didn't even get the title) and moreso than the others of the ministers in Louis XVI's cabinet he was extremely dependent on royal favor to stick around.

Also another problem is that a lot of his cuts, while practical in cleaning the finances of the court department were doing a lot to skirt the fact that it was nowhere near enough. Louis XV had had the same issue about 30 years earlier. The reforms that were needed included things like a proper cadastre of the provinces, but when it was tried in Normandy the provincial authorities in charge of it did everything in their power to stop it. French estates were very very well known at the time for cooking their books when it came to paying crown taxes. The other needed reform, taxing the church was not politically possible even for Louis XVI, who was significantly less reliant on the church than his predecessors.

Hiring Necker allowed Louis to juggle his finances a bit better. Firing him allowed him political manoeuvre room. Alternating the two...

Keeping Necker around is probably politically ASB. The political will to fix the financial situation was simply not there. Unfortunately for the French.

It is Turgot, rater than Necker, who could have saved the french state finances.

When Louis XVI was forced to call Necker back after July the 14th of 1789, Necker quickly proved himself what he was and had always been : an incompetent who was not up to the situation.

But he was up to 1790 the darling of annuitants to whom he served served high interest rates, the problem being that these high rates aggravated the debt crisis and made it unsolvable by other means than bankrupcy.

Matteo said:

It is Turgot, rater than Necker, who could have saved the french state finances.

When Louis XVI was forced to call Necker back after July the 14th of 1789, Necker quickly proved himself what he was and had always been : an incompetent who was not up to the situation.

But he was up to 1790 the darling of annuitants to whom he served served high interest rates, the problem being that these high rates aggravated the debt crisis and made it unsolvable by other means than bankrupcy.

Click to expand...

ok so if turgot remained what happens