trekaddict - I wouldn't be so worried but the cliche count is already fairly high (unreliable Frenchmen, weakened America, Italy fighting badly, etc) and I do try and avoid tired old cliches like the plague.
Carlstadt Boy - You realise that just saying that is bound to offend several economic type chaps. After poking around in economic theory I've discovered two relevant points;
1. You can't get two economists to agree on anything. At all. Ever.
2. Keynesian Economics is not the Economics of Keynes. What the man actually said and what those words have been used to justify are very different things.
Jape - Indeed a good defence in the Far East will help ties there. As will not ending up in the EEC/EU; if Britain is going to subsidies overseas farmers it's much better they be Australian and New Zealand ones who will appreciate it than French ones who wont.
Canada though will be tricky, geography is just so dominant. And thanks for the compliment.
Duritz - I think you're right, though I confess my desire to drop economic realism is as much motivated by the fact I'm not sure in-depth economic theory action would be a good read (that and the fact I'd probably get it wrong
).
RAAF air-porn? I think I can mange that.
Mordhiem - I'd certainly agree Britain got through the depression better than many, I'm led to believe coming off gold early helped in that regard (on which note TTL the US is
still on gold
). Equally peak coal production was 1913 and never recovered post-war, all the old export markets found new supplies and the constant threat of nationalisation (and terrible labour relations) kept the industry hobbled.
Nathan Madien - Update after next we'll see the Amsterdam Conference, where US Vice-President White will explain to the world what 'Moral Neutrality' means. Good enough? (I guess that might depend on what he says.)
Carlstadt Boy - I've been told that such figures tend to under-estimate the contribution of financial services and so on. Given that the start of the 20th Century saw London become pre-eminent in such matters (while Germany and the US experienced more industrial development) the figures are, perhaps, somewhat suspect.
If more focus on metal bashing over dominating maritime insurance and financial chicanery would have helped the country is a different question. However it does keep happening and I suspect it's matter of culture and, apparently, commercial law that drives metal bashers to the Rhineland and financiers to London.
Atlantic Friend - I'll bear that recommendation in mind.
Maximus101 - I was aware King wasn't keen on it and would probably work towards free trade given half a chance. However Al Smith was from the protectionist wing of the Democrats so I imagine he'd be a much more protectionist President than the anti-tariff FDR. Indeed without Hull pushing one-to-one most favoured nation trade deals I'm not sure what the mechanism would be for lowering trade barriers with Canada.
Thus I don't think King has a lot of choice, with the Republicans back in the White House the barriers are going to stay up for the next few years and I think King will be forced, despite himself, to forge links with Britain or risk an electoral backlash.
Vann the Red - You say abject whore, I say man of taste and discretion. It's a matter of perspective.