[VictorPath]

The USSR economy did pretty well under Stalin, especially during the Depression that affected the west. Khrushchev deprioritized capital expenditures and that was the beginning of the end. Similar story in the DDR around the time of Stalin's death.

[georgeecollins]

No, that is completely wrong that the USSR economy did well during the depression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

There are many other sources / economists who will support that, wikipedia is just the fastest.

Stalin's government did do a great job of ramping up industrial production before and during WW2.

[VictorPath]

The same weather problems that hit the Ukraine in the early 1930s hit the US too https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl .

The economic landscape of the US at the time was the Depression, whereas the USSR economy was chugging along, other than the poor harvest in the Ukraine that year. Walter Duranty of the New York Times visited Ukraine at the time, and said the harvest was not a good one but a lot of reports coming out of the Ukraine were overblown.

[baybal2]

Both Victor's, and your point is completely incorrect.

The point is, whatever survivor's of thirties tell, thirties were a terrible time, even if they were living in a relatively well off Moscow.

That's the only truth, not that of lunatical historians which have nothing, but digits to look on, and imagining things well knowing that pretty much nothing in official economics documents from USSR' reflected reality.

Stalin, and his industrial proves is another busted for 100th time trope, straight out of original propaganda. A thing glaringly obvious to any Russian citizen who had at some time a surviving relative who went through that time, but not to people who purposefully keep returning to it for search of their worldview validation "alternative facts"

[VictorPath]

Well if the USSR economy was in shambles in 1941, that makes the Red Army's pushback of Barbarossa, and the reversal of initiative at Stalingrad all the more impressive.