AHC WI Depression prevented or postponed 5 years

Any way this could happen?

I assume it prevent FDR winning.

Probably changes other events. Would it butterfly or mearley postpone Hitler takng power
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Any way this could happen?

Surely this could happen. Many like to say that WWI made it inevitable, but with enough things going differently it could be postponed.

Answers to how the Depression could have been dealt with will probably mainly reflect ideological preferences.

So I'll leave that part of the discussion to others.

I assume it prevent FDR winning.

Yes- I think it makes Hoover into a two-termer

Probably changes other events. Would it butterfly or mearley postpone Hitler takng power

It could do either. It prevents Hitler coming into power in the wake of Hindenburg's death almost certainly. If the Nazis resurge in popularity when the Depression does happen, they would need to come to power through a somewhat different way.

Other events-

It could delay uncontrolled Japanese militarism and aggression.

However it would be more interesting to consider that it might not. Possibly trends in the late 20s Japanese military, rising concerns over nationalism and communism in China and after effects of the 1927 financial crisis could mean that the Mukden incident and creation of Manchukuo happen on schedule.

If so, the western response may not be so limp. Feeling financially secure and powerful in the years 1931 to 1933, Hoover and MacDonald may lead the 9 power treaty signatory nations in imposing economic sanctions and embargoes on Japan, and Japan may not be able to stand the pressure and certainly would not have hope of recourse against Britain or the USA by military means.

In the Soviet Union, Stalin's 5 year plan faces much greater difficulties, because, at least if we believe Adam Tooze's interpretation, Stalin will not be able to buy western talent and technology at such a steep discount as he was able to during OTL's depression.

In Britain, perhaps MacDonald keeps a Labour (as opposed to national coalition) government in power longer, and perhaps gets to expand social welfare policies a bit more. Perhaps Labour could put a more distinctive stamp on British foreign policy and colonial reform.

In the United States, there may be an attempt to uphold prohibition for longer. Black migration from the south continues at a higher rate than OTL.

Perhaps there is a general advance for a few years in basic science and technological application, with greater advancements in television technology and sound and color film.
 
I'd guess that to remove the trigger-that is, the crash in October 1929-you'd need to curtail buying on margin significantly early in the 1920s. A more astute SecTreas than Mellon in the Harding/Coolidge administration might have noticed what was happening and sounded an alarm over a possible bubble on Wall Street. My guess that had Charles Dawes, rather than Andrew Mellon, been SecTreas, he might well have made the necessary moves: certainly Dawes was more imaginative/creative than Mellon.

Perhaps curtailing buying on margin might not have prevented the crash altogether, but it surely would have mitigated it. Today, we might recall "the panic of 1929" instead of the Crash. And with a milder panic rather than a full-scale depression, the butterflies become roughly the size of great horned owls. I think you could start with the Nazis never getting traction sufficiently to be more than a low-to-mid-level party in Germany.

I disagree with the proposition that prohibition would have continued: by the late 1920s, most people were fed up with it and recognized it was a failure, so there would have been significant pressure for repeal put on both parties in the '32 campaign. Without a depression, probably the colorless Hoover would have won another term, and even he would have had to recognize that prohibition was going nowhere fast--and at least stood aside while repeal happened.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
..another political event that could be changed by a postponed Depression is a longer-lasting Primo De Rivera regime in Spain, which fell in OTL 1931, with later knock-on effects quite possibly forestalling the Spanish Popular Front and Civil War.
 
So what if Hoover decides not to run again and is succeeded by a Democrat (who wins narrowly due to GOP infighting) ?

Or Hoover serves 2 terms and the collapse happens in 37 under a Democrat (assuming 4 terms in a row is maximum for one party)
 
I'd guess that to remove the trigger-that is, the crash in October 1929-you'd need to curtail buying on margin significantly early in the 1920s. A more astute SecTreas than Mellon in the Harding/Coolidge administration might have noticed what was happening and sounded an alarm over a possible bubble on Wall Street. My guess that had Charles Dawes, rather than Andrew Mellon, been SecTreas, he might well have made the necessary moves: certainly Dawes was more imaginative/creative than Mellon.

Perhaps curtailing buying on margin might not have prevented the crash altogether, but it surely would have mitigated it. Today, we might recall "the panic of 1929" instead of the Crash. And with a milder panic rather than a full-scale depression, the butterflies become roughly the size of great horned owls. I think you could start with the Nazis never getting traction sufficiently to be more than a low-to-mid-level party in Germany.

I disagree with the proposition that prohibition would have continued: by the late 1920s, most people were fed up with it and recognized it was a failure, so there would have been significant pressure for repeal put on both parties in the '32 campaign. Without a depression, probably the colorless Hoover would have won another term, and even he would have had to recognize that prohibition was going nowhere fast--and at least stood aside while repeal happened.

The problem is the crash was a symptom not a cause. Remember the market was already in an overall downturn from September on.

Sure the market crash shook people's confidence in the good times continuing but it alone didn't cause the Great Depression.

Deflation had a handle as well. Good production for the first half of 1930 was higher then it had been for all of 1929. Even without a crash there is simply no way those good could have been sold for their expected prices. With too many goods chasing too few dollars you get into a deflation spiral.

In fact the last major deflation spiral (1873-1879 with some going late at 1896) was the originally called the Great Depression before the 1930s one hit. It was renamed the Long Depression.

And that is just one of the proposed causes. Economists still can't agree on what caused the Great Depression. Heck, some point to Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 as the real cause while other argue it was in reaction to the economic problems.



I should note that deep enough panic can unseat a President as demonstrated by Martin Van Buren and the Panic of 1837. Also the Long Depression itself was kicked off by a panic (1873) so changing the 1929 crash to a panic may not prevent the Hoover-Roosevelt change over.

Also Andrew Mellon was doing reverse Reaganomics: by the time 1927 rolled around only the wealthiest 2% of taxpayers paid any federal income tax. But it was working because spending was flat allowing one-fourth of the federal debt to be paid off. An interesting side effect of this was that state and local spending grew to where they actually exceeding the federal budget in 1927.
 
Last edited:
AHC WI Depression prevented or postponed 5 years

Are we talking about the global string of depressions to hit the US and Europe between 1929 and 1933? Or just the Wall Street Crash of 29 and the following Great Depression?

In the latter case: The Dust Bowl and resulting treck from the farms into the cities will still happen, but the oil boom might succeed in more Okies ending up in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Dallas and Houston then jn California. Even so President Hoover will have a humanitarian crisis at hand of the magnitude of five Hurricane Catrinas in a row and his chances of re-election will depend on how well he does on these. FDR will still run in 32 but with no real program on economics, his other promise -repealing prohibition- will now be the defining issue.

Of course, unrestrained speculation on Wall Street will still continue so when the nig crash finally comes five years later it will be twice as big and will probably cost FDR his reelection. And the next president might not be able to solve that one, even with three terms. If WWII still happens on time, the US might be not the powerhouse able to take on Europe and the Pacific at the same time.

My thoughts on a global depression will come in another post.
 
AHC WI GLOBAL Depression prevented or postponed 5 years

Okay I have done the US now. Let's look at a worldwide 1929-1933 depression prevented postponed 5 years.

Globally the situation for each country is a bit different but overall, there will be a more robust economy with more and more widespread welfare and less interest in extreme left- or right wing politics in favor of the more centrist democratic parties.

In Germany the Weimar Repunlic, for all its shortcommings will have a few more good years and may be even a few chances to iron out their ineffectiveness. The Nazi party will still rise, but at an overall slower pace, possibly being eclipsed by the German Communists so if the depression hits five years down the road Germany has a more even chance of becoming extreme left instead of extreme right. For now however it becomes an economic powerhouse leading the way in aircraft design, applied arts (Hugo Junker's success as an airplane producer will directly reflect on his patronage of the Bauhaus school in his town of Dessau..) education and movie production.

In Britain the current Labour government has a few more golden years in which to achieve welfare for all, which might leave them better equipped to deal with the depression later on as many of the institutions the OTL American Roosevelt had to build up from scratch would already be up and running in the UK. Their main problem would not be what to do with all those unemployed but how to keep unemployment benefits and back-to-work programs funded.

France and Spain will probably not see a full-blown victory of socialist governments by 1936. For Spain that might postpone the Civil War for 5 years, or even butterfly it away completely. Catalonia will have five more years to grow and might end up being the powerhouse it is today - which has its own set of butterflies for when the Civil War will finally occur.

France will be keeping an uneasy eye on Germany rising, but with no apparent military tread will just focus on outdoing the Germans in industry, art and sports. Even better times for Hemmingway and Josephine Baker...

Belgium will have time to completely rebuilt from the ravages of the war and -as Belgium always does when times are just too perfect- gets itself tied up in another row of infighting between Flanders and Wallonia.

With 5 more years before depression, war, reconstruction and then the rise of ecological thinking the Netherlands go full speed ahead with turning the newly diked-in Zuiderzee -now called the Eisselmeer- into agrarian polderland. By 1940 they have 'won back' almost the complete area and increased their size by 50% (OTL only half of the area is turned into land and with the overall shift from agriculture to post-industrialism there are no plans to go any further in the foreseeable future.)
 
Last edited:
Top