This passage was written by famed british economist john maynard keynes in 1919. according to [the french] vision of the future, european history is to be a perpetual prize-fight, of which france has won this round, but of which this round is certainly not the last. . the policy of reducing germany to servitude for a generation, of degrading the lives of millions of human beings, and of depriving a whole nation of happiness should be abhorrent and detestable, – even if it were possible, even if it enriched ourselves, even if it did not sow the decay of the whole civilized life of europe. –john m. keynes, the economic consequences of the peace what is maynard keynes’s view of the treaty?

Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles with the Allies,officially ending World War 1.The British economist John Maynard Keynes left the treaty conference in protest. In his The Economic Consequences of the Peace 1919, Keynes predicted that the stiff war reparations and other harsh terms imposed on Germany by the Treaty would lead to financial collapse of Germany,which in turn would have serious economic and political repercussions on Europe and the World.

On June 5,1919 ,Keynes wrote a note to Lloyd George PM of England,that he was resigning his post in protest of the impending devastation of Europe.

In his book Keynes wrote""if we aim at the impoverishment of Central Europe,vengeance,I dare say will not limp.Nothing can then delay for very long the forces of Reaction and the despairing convulsions of Revolution,before which the horrors of the later German war will fade into nothing,and which will destroy, whoever is victor,the civilisation and the progress of our generation.""    

B - It is detestable and will bring about the end of European civilization.

for starters, there is the structural trend of rising primary government expenditure as a share of gdp, which reached 36% in 2014, up from 22% in 1991. this increase reflected a political desire to address the poverty and inequality that had gone unaddressed during previous decades. to support the increase, brazil’s government increased taxes on consumption and promoted progress toward labor-market formalization. nonetheless, public investment, particularly in infrastructure, took a hit. in fact, with the exception of the 2005-2008 period, total investment as a share of gdp has remained below 20% since 1991.

true

explanation: