Napoleonrules
Banned
In 1913 the US GDP PER CAPITA (which takes into account population differences) was 75% more than that of Germany. This is before WWI. From 1870 to 1913 the US economy grew by 117% versus Germany's 100% increase.
No World War I. Who gets the Atomic bomb?
- Thread starter kernals12
- Start date
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
Are you sure?
The data I have is that in 1913 German per capita GDP was USD 4180 while US was USD 5300 ... which would roughly fit German per capita GDP being 75% of the US figure?
Napoleonrules
Banned
You seem to be using "purchasing power parity" and I don't feel, at least in 1913 that's a fair comparison given that it would be hard(er) to figure out the PPP number as accurately. It's hard enough to recreate retroactively using a metric such as GDP (which wasn't used back then, instead GNP was used, and they are different calculations).
kernals12
Banned
What WWI brought to the US was a requirement to divert capital and labor from consumer goods and productive investment to weapons of war. War does not make countries richer. George Bush promoted the "peace dividend" that was possible from reducing defense spending after the Berlin wall fell.
kernals12
Banned
GNP and GDP are virtually interchangeable for almost all countries (with a few exceptions, I'm looking at you Ireland).
kernals12
Banned
We passed antitrust laws that prevented this. Japan and Germany were the ones who loved their Cartels.
kernals12
Banned
The 2018 Maddison Database has 5513 for Germany and 8101 for the US in 1913, that's 68%.
Vladivostok? That would be a kick in the crotch to take out the only Pacific port of significance--and the terminus of the Trans-Siberian Railway to boot.
I have a German academic paper open right now, values for 1910, in 1990s Dollars:
Germany 3348
USA 4964
UK 4611
And now in 1920:
Germany 2796
USA 5552
UK 4611
kernals12
Banned
The presidencies of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson demonstrate that the US was aiming for a greater role in the world. In fact, the isolationism of the 20s and 30s was caused by the backlash to Wilson's ideas.
What I mean is they are literally isolated and probably aren't going to be pursuing conflicts that necessitate the development of A-Bombs. European players meanwhile have each other on their doorstep to contend with and that is probably grounds for development of weapons. Honestly though, I feel like nuclear power would probably come before the bomb assuming no world wars.
kernals12
Banned
That literal isolation becomes impossible by the 1950s thanks to long range aircraft and intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Yup and the US would probably be following Europe. I don't think they are going to be getting A bombs first, probably in response to Germany or Britain developing them. I don't see why they would get them first.
Edit: Wait the sorry OP asks who gets them, not who's first? Then everyone gets them, the German Empire, UK, France, the US, probably Russia, Japan, Hell maybe even Austria-Hungary if they live that long, China assuming they are in one piece eventually, maybe India/the Raj. All the major powers will start getting them, they will all have the money and RnD at various points assuming they hold together.
Last edited:
Here is a more likely scenario - what if Bomb development is curtailed series of high-profile reactor accidents puts a general chill on atomic research. ITTL, you had a unique set of circumstances which brought together many of the best and brightest scientists to collaborate on a massively funded project. Without that, you could have numerous researchers puttering away, underfunded and working in relative isolation. Maybe Szilard stays in Hungary, Fermi never leaves Italy, etc, etc. It isn't too much of a stretch to imagine an atomic pile, a-la CP-1, built with a little less foresight and irradiating some university buildings in Munich. Or maybe the hungover grad student stuck turning out some odd metallic cylinders in the machine shop misreads the scrawled notes the prof left him, and they end up slightly over critical mass when the prof tries to "tickle the dragon's tail" later that day, and a sizable part of Rome evaporates very quickly.
Imagine going to the Dean of Cornell University, hat in hand...
"You want funds to continue atomic research?"
"Yes, sir. We would like to investigate power generation -"
"Isn't that what they were doing at Cambridge in '38?"
"Yes, but most of the staff survi-"
"And that incident in Toronto..."
"Well, to be fair, we don't know what happened there, but based on the crater we -"
"What about Copenhagen?"
"Ah, see, Copenhagen is a bit of a mystery still. We should be able to answer what happened there with some investigation, in, say," - hurriedly consults a slide-rule, mumbling about decay and isotopes - "ah, about 32 years. It should be safe for brief visits by then."
"Feynman..."
"Yes, sir?"
"Get out."
Napoleonrules
Banned
No. China's GDP is $300 Billion more than its GNP. For the US GDP is $250 Billion more than the GNP. Not an insignificant difference and certainly not virtually interchangeable. (numbers based on Knoema, a public data platform, from an article in Investopedia)
kernals12
Banned
America's GDP is $18 trillion. $250 billion is just 1.4%. Never quote big numbers without putting them in context.
Napoleonrules
Banned
I agree "everyone gets them" but only until "someone" uses them in a war. Then I believe we'd definitely get a non-proliferation treaty and, yes as in OTL, nations still work on it and get it, the spread will slow down to where we can say "not everyone will get them".