6 ms·

The article covers all that. Warburg missed the freedom, and excitement, of the German markets in the 20s and 30s. So created an instrument, Eurobonds, in the

The article covers all that. Warburg missed the freedom, and excitement, of the German markets in the 20s and 30s. So created an instrument, Eurobonds, in the 1960s to escape the carefully constructed international limitations of Bretton Woods. Add further desire to be outside the system from the US not being a neutral arbiter of the postwar international currency. That led to the inspiration for Eurobonds: the Eurodollar market. Thus course was set on the race to the bottom. The US came off the Gold Standard, Bretton Woods was deconstructed and most national regulations that responded to the depression and war were repealed along the way. That Warburg managed to get away with something so artificially constructed to evade laws is, to say the least, disappointing.

simonh 8y ago
>That Warburg managed to get away with something so artificially constructed to evade laws is, to say the least, disappointing. Why should a person in London be bound by laws in the US? Warburg did nothing illegal. I’m all for the rule of law in general, but it’s unreasonable to try to use laws to distort fundamental economic reality, while also actually acting in such a way to undermine the economic system those laws were supposed to create. That’s what the US was doing. They were trying to cheat the markets for political purposes.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  The UK was an enthusiastic participant to Bretton Woods and the Bank of England was not yet an independent body. I would have assumed that UK laws and regulations were updated similarly to facilitate Bretton Woods, not just the US. In fact I was under the impression they had been resulting in the dullness of City banking, and the unprecedented period of stable growth etc, postwar through to the 60s. Even had they not BoE should have been able, or been required, to step in and regulate it out of existence - or at least out of the UK. > trying to cheat the markets for political purposes Fundamentally disagree here. Markets need strong regulation for purposes that need not be political at all.

simonh 8y ago

>That Warburg managed to get away with something so artificially constructed to evade laws is, to say the least, disappointing. Why should a person in London be bound by laws in the US? Warburg did nothing illegal. I’m all for the rule of law in general, but it’s unreasonable to try to use laws to distort fundamental economic reality, while also actually acting in such a way to undermine the economic system those laws were supposed to create. That’s what the US was doing. They were trying to cheat the markets for political purposes.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago
The UK was an enthusiastic participant to Bretton Woods and the Bank of England was not yet an independent body. I would have assumed that UK laws and regulations were updated similarly to facilitate Bretton Woods, not just the US. In fact I was under the impression they had been resulting in the dullness of City banking, and the unprecedented period of stable growth etc, postwar through to the 60s. Even had they not BoE should have been able, or been required, to step in and regulate it out of existence - or at least out of the UK. > trying to cheat the markets for political purposes Fundamentally disagree here. Markets need strong regulation for purposes that need not be political at all.