1938 job employment Germany

Authors Avatar


‘By 1938, Hitler had created full employment in Germany. This is proof that Nazi economic policy was a success.’ How far do you agree with this statement?

        The Nazi’s economic policy certainly benefited Germany with unemployment rates drastically reduced, big businesses significantly boosted by rearmament, propaganda further exposed through the KPD and DAF, the currency stable and a steady increase in investments, and infrastructure in place to enable economic expansion along with many other improvements. However, there were also aspects of failure in which the German people took the toll. The people’s wages were no higher in 1939 in comparison with 1928 and the number of working hours increased while the worker’s rights were diminished.  Hitler placed more emphasis on what he believed the nation needed in the future, rather than the demands from other party members, and the present needs of the people (guns and butter debate).

As Hitler chose to rearm Germany faster, the level of lifestyle for the German people decreased with luxury items and consumer goods slowly became a rarity.  Goerring, the new control over trade instinctively sped up rearmament so that the import value that would have been spent on food for the people, were spent on raw materials for the army.

Join now!

The aim of employing the nation was a definite success, with only 0.2 million unemployed by 1938, and an overall success of 0.8 million more employed in comparison with1928. However wages for the employed steadily decreased as a percentage of national income. The Public Works Schemes brought about a large number of jobs in building of autobahns and hoems. . Tax concessions and grants were provided, which stimulated demand to further strengthen the economy. More jobs were created in government bureaucracy and subsidies were given for hiring workers in the private sector. In terms of employment, Nazi ideology was most ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a star student thought of this essay


The quality of written communication is average in this essay. As a piece of coursework, some mistakes are almost unacceptable. Such small mistakes leave a bad impression on some examiners and this is, of course, best to avoid. Needless to say, double (and triple) checking is very important and this is especially if the markscheme has marks for the quality of written communication! (They are 'silly' marks to lose!!)

The answer is evident but the essay seems to try to address too much in one go. Certainly, according to the student's approach, it is important to address the other factors of employment demonstrating a successful economic policy but don't get too caught up on the one side. It is definitely more quality than quantity that gives way to a strong essay. The strengths of the essay is the detail that is given (there are many examples evident in the essay). This gives the argument more support but the student must remember to always fully develop the evidence they use.

This is a very tough question to approach as the student has to address the question of whether Hitler had achieved full employment and then whether this dictates completely the success of the economic policy. The student has made a good attempt at answering the latter part of the question and has only skimmed over the former. This said, the argument is evident and validly supported in some cases. In attempting to address whether Hitler created full employment, a simple approach would to fully and explicitly state that, for the sake of argument, in the essay the argument that is presented is assuming that Hitler did (or did not) create full employment. Whilst this avoids a part of the question, it is perhaps a valid approach instead of simply skimming over it as this leaves out the main question - of course full employment was never achieved as Hitler never counted people like the Jews or the Gypsies, for example.