I'm somewhat inclined to disagree with you on this; however, I propose there's good ground to reconcile the essence of your criticism with what I believe to be the most important part of Kershaw's argument about the character of Hitler's recovery, namely that it was by and large built on unsustainable fiscal grounds. Assuming for the moment that the Silverman statistics are require no especial alteration, and that the dramatic reduction of unemployment coinciding with Hitler's deficit spending policies was approximately as substantial as it looks like, we still appear to be left with a Germany teetering on the edge of a public finances catastrophe towards the end of the thirties -- subsequently, of course, Hitler goes to war, and by turns forcibly exports his inflation to the west, pillages the east, and so forth, under a war-time economic basis.