Thanks. My knowledge on debts, war finance and the financial system on the beginning of the 20. century is limited. Therefore I assume, that I exaggerate some economic effects or underestimate several aspects. Maybe I need to find statistical data about the trade connections and budget of the early 20. century USA.If you keep the US out, then you don't get any problems from defaults. Until the US entered the war, and for the time it took to show the US how desperate the Entente was during the war, the US only issued secured loans (about 2 Billion, compared to roughly 8 billion unsecured after it entered the war). That meant that if the loans were defaulted on then the US would seize the collateral to cover the loss of the loan. Now there were unsecured loans made by people in the US before US entry, but the Treasury warned against them. You would need someone besides McAdoo running the Treasury, whatever else you can say about the man (and you can say a lot) he was competent. Maybe the House of Morgan, who made unsecured loans OTL keeps doing it longer than they should, and drags the US economy into a crisis, possibly exaggerating by a bombing of their HQ like OTL
Of course the loss of even 10 Billion of loans is less than the 27 Billion the US spent on the War, plus half a billion a year or so on Veterans care
Realistically if the US stays out of the war, the Recession is less bad, it was caused by war spending stopping and war plants closing, there will be fewer plants built and a more gradual reduction over 1917-1919 if the US stays out
That means, that we need at least a incompetent Secretary of the Treasury. But I also need to find a way to create the economical chaos I want to have. It seems plausible that most governments would demand some securities for their loans.
It seems that we need at the same time an American participation of the war, and a better performance of the Central Powers, which contradicts itself. Maybe a Second American Civil War is cool, but to create it is difficult, especially for a non-american notexpert writer. Another option would be to prefer isolationism or create conflicts with Japan for the United States and leave the idea of exporting chaos to the Americas.
At the moment, I don't know enough about Sweden or Norway to export instability to these countries.For bonus points, let the civil war in Finland spill west and to create instability for Sweden as well. Maybe even a Swedish civil war in the 20s.
But the result of this scenario would be a WW2 or a Great European War.Have Leon Trotsky become leader of the Soviet Union and spend massive amounts of resources to export Communism to other countries. During the Great Depression multiple countries either fall to communism or fascism(As a reaction of course) this eventually leads to war heading in to the 1940's with countries turning on eachother.