The eternal theme of this world is only - profit. Britain and France have serious conflicts of interest, and there is not enough external pressure, so it is naturally impossible to truly unite.

The fact that the Second Empire of Time and Space put so much pressure on the French that the Paris government would rather spend a lot of money to win over the Russians than move closer to the British at the first time is enough to illustrate the problem.

After the Franco-Prussian War, both the Germans and the British became France's greatest enemies, and in the decades that followed, Britain and France came close to war several times.

The contradiction between Germany and France can surpass the contradiction between Britain and France, or because of the death of Wilhelm II, which repeatedly stimulated the national sentiment of the French and was used by the British.

Realizing that the Germans threatened their interests, the British took the initiative to unleash goodwill on the French.

Even so, the Paris government hesitated for a long time before putting down its face and becoming a little brother, otherwise the two sides would not have been so easy to compromise.

Needless to say, France in the middle of the day doesn't feel threatened, so why should he be the younger brother of the British?

Thinking of this, Franz was relieved. The Anglo-French contradictions, Anglo-Austrian contradictions, and Franco-Austrian contradictions are intertwined, which is the most stable pattern.

In the case of serious conflicts of interest between each other, Britain, France and Austria were able to sit together, and it has to be said that diplomacy is really delicate.

Once the external problems are over, it is the turn of the internal problems. In recent years, the Austrian economy seems to have taken advantage of the Second Industrial Revolution to flourish.

Not only Austria, but the entire European continent is booming, taking the railway industry as an example, from 1870 ~ 1875 the total length of European railways increased by 58%.

Among them, the Pop-Po Confederation and the Russian Empire grew the fastest, followed by Grand France and the Nordic Confederation, and the Anglo-Austrian railways developed earlier, and now the growth rate has slowed down.

Of course, this growth rate is related to the base, and the fact that Austria is growing slowly does not mean that it has built fewer railways than other countries.

The growth rate of the Russians is the most rebellious, and everyone else is a percentage of growth, and they directly have to describe it by how many times the growth has been.

This is not because the tsarist government is very good at building railways, but mainly because the Russian railway industry is developing slowly. After the Russo-Prussian War, the total length of railways opened to traffic in the Russian Empire was less than 3,000 kilometers, and it was really not difficult to double.

In 1870, the total length of railways opened to traffic in Austria exceeded 60,000 kilometers, and the base was there, and the growth rate naturally slowed down.

Franz's original plan for a large railway is no longer just a plan, and after more than 20 years of efforts by the Vienna government, it is nearing completion.

Perhaps 20 years ago, 100,000 kilometers of railways were just a dream, but today, the total mileage of Austria's open railways + railways under construction has exceeded 100,000 kilometers.

By the end of 1875, 76,000 kilometers had been opened to traffic in Austria, and within five years there would be more than 100,000 kilometers of railways.

Of course, in addition to the rapid development of the domestic economy, the main factor causing the data explosion is the "African localization strategy".

So far, as many as 23 cities and regions have been approved by the Imperial Diet to join the mainland, and the area of this part of the territory is approaching one million square kilometers.

As the area of the country grows, the demand for railways naturally increases. Nearly 10,000 kilometers of railways have been opened to traffic in this part of the territory, and 8,000 kilometers of railways are under construction.

The data is strictly confidential, and once it is released, it will definitely shock the world.

Of course, secrecy is relative to ordinary people, not a secret to politicians, and the railroad lies there and can't be hidden, as long as you want to know, it's still easy to investigate.

In those days, railways did not represent national strength, and Austria had the largest railway mileage in the world, followed not by John Bull, nor France, but by the United States of America.

If it weren't for the split in the United States, they would certainly have had the most total railroad miles now, because the third largest total railroad mileage was the Confederate States of America.

This is very frustrating, because European countries have limited mainland area, and the density of regional railways may be higher than that of the Americans, but the total mileage cannot be compared.

The country with the highest railway density is Britain, the British Isles are surrounded by the sea, and there are still a staggering 23,000 kilometers of railways that have been opened to traffic.

This density is beyond the reach of Austria. Not to mention that now, even Franz's big railway plan cannot catch up with the British when it is fully implemented.

Knowing is knowing, but Franz had no intention of emulating. One of the main reasons for the high density of railways in the British is the high degree of duplication of construction.

It is important to know that the British railways are extremely unevenly distributed, and the capitalists only invest in the railways in the economically developed areas, while the economically backward areas are not cared for.

The British Isles are surrounded by the sea, and they are just economically developed areas, so why do they need so many railways? If it is properly planned and distributed, the UK's transportation can go to a higher level.

Obviously, this is not possible. Capital pursues profits, money-making businesses are robbed, and loss-making transactions are not asked.

If Austria had not used monopoly as a bait from the beginning, deceived the capitalists into the trap, and tied up the railways in the developed and backward areas, the current domestic railway construction would probably follow in the footsteps of the British.

Austria's railway bundling plan suffered an economic crisis on the eve of the dawn, and the capitalists who thought they had earned money in blood directly turned into blood losses because of the rupture of funds.

The same routine can only be played once, and before that, Austria had not completed industrialization, and was not even eligible to enjoy the economic crisis, so everyone's vigilance was naturally not strong.

The capitalists ignored the risks of long-term investment and were fooled by the word "monopoly".

Not to mention that local capitalists are inexperienced, even international capital such as Britain and France are no exception, and they have been fooled by the word "monopoly", and hundreds of millions of Aegis investments have been directly trapped in railway construction.

The financially strong persisted, and the weaker were forced to sell, allowing the Austrian government to copy the bottom and continue the unfinished railway project.

Until now, rail investment is still popular, but it has nothing to do with madness. The main thing is policy, and the Vienna government has intervened in the pricing of railway freight.

At the same time, the government also stipulates that railways are public infrastructure, with a certain public welfare nature, and the annual profits of railway companies must not exceed 30%.

Frankly, this figure is tempting, with few industries making 30 percent profits, with the exception of the financial industry.

However, this is completely different from the windfall profits that the capitalists are chasing. After all, railways are large investment projects, and the calculation of profits is based on turnover, not total investment.

If the total investment is calculated, it is impossible to do this without a single railway in Austria that has an annual rate of return of more than 30 percent, not even in the world.

The only advantage is probably the stable income. Austrian railways have been growing steadily in turnover, with an annual growth rate of no less than three percent.

Affected by economic development, the turnover of some sections of the road has soared by dozens of percent in a year.

In addition to freight, railway companies also have other profit models, for example: real estate projects around the station, all of which are the industry of the railway company, or have participated in investment.

The station is not a tall thing, and there are many places that can be repaired. The railway company is not stupid, if there is no interest, why should the station be built there?

Moving forward or backward will not affect the normal operation of the railway. In those days, there was no competition from planes, automobiles and railways, and even if the station was a few kilometers away, everyone still had no choice.

After flipping through the report at first, Franz smiled with satisfaction. In 1875, Austria's economic growth rate exceeded 8% again, and the dividends brought by the second industrial revolution had already begun to ferment.

Among them, the performance of the power industry is the most prominent, with an astonishing annual growth rate of 23.6%, which is completely unbeatable.

In contrast, the development rate of traditional industries is dwarfed, such as the textile industry, which emerged at the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the current industry growth rate is only a pitiful 1.8%.

However, behind this data, the Austrian textile industry increased its production capacity by 5.6%. What this means is too obvious, capacity growth is much faster than the growth rate of industry output, which means that industry profits are declining.

Of course, technological progress has also led to a decline in production costs, and when it comes to a particular company, profits may rise.

However, it is an indisputable fact that the growth rate of the industry has slowed down. Competition in traditional industries is intensifying, and declining profits are the general trend.

It's not something that can be changed by manpower. The more science and technology develop, the higher the added value of products, and the primary industry with no technical content will only get thinner and thinner, and in the end it can only fight for costs.

Of course, there are exceptions, for example: the steel industry, in terms of time, has a history of thousands of years, a proper traditional industry, but the steel industry is still developing rapidly.

In 1875, Austria's steel production exceeded 8 million tons, leaving the British behind and ranking first in the world.

Steel production of the world's major countries during the same period:

Austria 8.23 million tons, steel production 960,000 tons;

7.42 million tons in the United Kingdom, 760,000 tons of steel;

France has 2.74 million tons and steel production is 235,000 tons;

1,556,000 tonnes of steel and 315,000 tonnes of steel in the German Federal Empire (plus the Rhineland)

1.54 million tonnes in the United States of America, with 146,000 tonnes of steel;

The Russian Empire produced 1.042 million tons and 24,000 tons of steel

968,000 tons of Pubo Federation, 126,000 tons of steel;

346,000 tons in the United States of America, 38,000 tons of steel;

……

The rest of the countries are negligible, and big data shows that the French have fallen behind, and the gap continues to widen.

It's not that the Paris government won't develop the economy, it's completely forced by reality, and the coal mines in France are buried relatively deep, the coal seams are shallow, and they are accompanied by gas.

The mining cost itself is high, but the quality is not good. It's okay to use it for ironmaking, but forget about steelmaking, import is the only way out.

In this context, the French also played with black technology, that is, charcoal ironmaking. As far as Franz knows, the French steel company is still working on charcoal steelmaking.

This is no joke, a significant part of French steel production is made from charcoal. Many French metallurgists swore in the newspapers that the iron produced from charcoal was of the best quality.

Don't be surprised, charcoal ironmaking is a traditional craft that has been around for thousands of years.

At present, the French are still studying charcoal steelmaking technology, and have also achieved phased results, in the laboratory the French have used charcoal to smelt qualified steel.

It is a pity that mass production cannot be achieved, and in the industrial trial production, the steel made by this technology can not only not be guaranteed, but even the cost requires human life.

These practical problems did not dampen the enthusiasm of the French capitalists, who continued to work this road of no return.

The capitalists have a reason for doing this, because France has insufficient coal production and poor quality, but it is rich in forest resources, and once the charcoal steelmaking technology breaks through, it can get out of the predicament in an instant.

If you learn from Britain and Austria, coke can only be imported, and this cost alone has made the French steel industry lose its market competitiveness.

In France, a country with a developed financial industry, the vast majority of steel companies are listed companies. Whether it succeeds or not, it is not surprising that charcoal steelmaking must be drawn to convince investors.

Under the trend of profits, capitalists must also firmly believe that this is correct, otherwise how to drive the stock price?

Compared with the same period in history, the development of France's steel industry in this era was quite good, and the biggest impact was still the divided United States.

The United States of America inherited most of the American industry, but its development was very difficult. Without the markets of the South and the trauma of the war, the economy of the United States would not have fared well.

The United States, which inherited two-thirds of the United States, has less than half of its comprehensive national strength for the same period in history. Shrinking markets + labor shortages are the main factors restricting the economic development of the United States.

Due to the butterfly effect, the number of European immigrants to the United States in the last two decades has been less than one-third of that in the same period in history.

No one has no market, and industry will inevitably shrink, which is not something that can be changed by manpower.

Coupled with political factors, the disgrace of the federal government due to the defeat of the war was discredited, and many federal states did not bow to the central government.

Each federal state has a leadership team, and each of them formulates policies around their own state. The so-called big-picture concept, sorry, doesn't exist at all.

It is not uncommon to see certain federal states erecting trade barriers to protect their own businesses and industries; It is also possible to see certain states opening their doors to bring in industrial and commercial products from all over the world.

These policies are for their own benefit, and the government will set up trade barriers to protect the industrial products that can be produced locally.

Industrial products that cannot be produced locally and must be purchased from outside will naturally be bought by whoever is cheap and easy to use.

As a result of these factors, the United States of America, which lacked labor force after the war, had to introduce people of color in a big way in order to recover its economy.

In particular, cheap contract workers are the most popular among capitalists. The labor provided by these labor export companies is essentially no different from that of slaves, except for the addition of nominal personal freedom.

The steel industry in the United States of America has been able to achieve its current size, and these cheap foreign labor are also indispensable.

However, the sequelae are also quite serious, and this predatory exploitation has made the racial contradictions in the United States increasingly high.

Solving these problems will not be done overnight. At the very least, there must be a strong government that brings the various states together.