Two third of the population was unemployed, and as orewell write here "the situation in Germany, with its seven million unemployed, was obviously favourable for demagogues".
Starving, economical depression and without any hope in sight. Then within a couple of years half or more of those previous unemployed got a job from the government and the government refused to do any more reparations and redirecting those fund back to the populace (farmed food was a common item in reparations).
Meanwhile Silvio Gesell just wanted a simple currency and land reform at the time to make it easier to pay off the reparations without dooming the country into poverty.
Nowadays people write books how he was literally worse than Hitler. It is kind of amusing how easy it is to be hated by everyone because you have a difficult to attack argument.
Is the idea of negative interest rates really that taboo? I personally got interested in negative interest rates due to macro economic balance mechanics which don't even require the existence of a real economy to justify negative interest rates. If you want to shrink the money supply without causing a deflationary spiral you must lower the interest rate below zero so that the real interest rate is zero which is fair for consumers and savers alike.
Starving, economical depression and without any hope in sight. Then within a couple of years half or more of those previous unemployed got a job from the government and the government refused to do any more reparations and redirecting those fund back to the populace (farmed food was a common item in reparations).