Isaac Chan’s Reviews > The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance > Status Update
Isaac Chan
is on page 96 of 812
Note 1/2:
Some reflections on the so-called 'baronial age' of the House of Morgan: did sovereigns of the day not have public bond markets? Why did they have to go so far as to turn to a private banker - Pierpont? Sovereigns of some shitty 3rd-world country, understandable - but even King Edward VII had a relationship with Morgan? The global hegemony of the time had to get finance from a private bank? What was the ...
— Apr 17, 2026 08:17AM
Some reflections on the so-called 'baronial age' of the House of Morgan: did sovereigns of the day not have public bond markets? Why did they have to go so far as to turn to a private banker - Pierpont? Sovereigns of some shitty 3rd-world country, understandable - but even King Edward VII had a relationship with Morgan? The global hegemony of the time had to get finance from a private bank? What was the ...
Like flag
Isaac’s Previous Updates
Isaac Chan
is on page 111 of 812
Note 1/2:
I'm increasingly starting to see 'The house of Morgan' as a fertile ground to observe how attitudes towards capitalism have morphed over history.
Chernow writes that 'both Theodore Roosevelt and Morgan disliked the rugged, individualistic economy of the 19th century and favoured big business; they wanted to promote US entry into world markets.'
Interesting turn of events - today, 'rugged individualism'...
— Apr 18, 2026 08:34PM
I'm increasingly starting to see 'The house of Morgan' as a fertile ground to observe how attitudes towards capitalism have morphed over history.
Chernow writes that 'both Theodore Roosevelt and Morgan disliked the rugged, individualistic economy of the 19th century and favoured big business; they wanted to promote US entry into world markets.'
Interesting turn of events - today, 'rugged individualism'...
Isaac Chan
is on page 70 of 812
Note 1/2:
A point here about Pierpont's beliefs disproved my theory about work's capture of the rich - Chernow writes that Pierpont disdained the rich young men in the social clubs of New York for not working. Pierpont, supposedly, believed that the rich had some sort of duty. As superior members of society, they had a moral obligation to set a good example to not live lives of idleness.
— Apr 10, 2026 06:26AM
A point here about Pierpont's beliefs disproved my theory about work's capture of the rich - Chernow writes that Pierpont disdained the rich young men in the social clubs of New York for not working. Pierpont, supposedly, believed that the rich had some sort of duty. As superior members of society, they had a moral obligation to set a good example to not live lives of idleness.
Isaac Chan
is on page 18 of 812
Note 1/2:
A thought just struck me: since my uni days I had been fixated on the concept that investment banks are the mightiest financiers of the economy - they are the institutions who financed corporations that directly create value for us in the real economy, e.g. General Electric, Apple, Honda and whatnot. They raise capital via ECM and DCM, and a company would go to an investment bank if they need funds either
— Mar 24, 2026 04:53AM
A thought just struck me: since my uni days I had been fixated on the concept that investment banks are the mightiest financiers of the economy - they are the institutions who financed corporations that directly create value for us in the real economy, e.g. General Electric, Apple, Honda and whatnot. They raise capital via ECM and DCM, and a company would go to an investment bank if they need funds either
nature of these borrowings? Term loans, or public bond issues by the banks? Well now that I think about it, Britain got itself in crippling debt from private bankers during the world wars which had a direct effect on the collapse of British power.
Moreover, this commentary on the global reserve currency thus far reminds me of the interesting Triffin paradox. It seems that the rising hegemon will usually hesitate to step into the role of the issuer of the global reserve currency, like how the US did after the wars. This conjecture makes me guess that China may hesitate to issue the renminbi as the global reserve currency as well. 3 cheers for the near-term future of dollar dominance, then! Although I am no longer an ardent fan of the US and its institutions as I used to be, due to the unpalatability and incompetence that I see in the current administration, I do still believe that it holds the liberal world together (because none of the other prominent liberal states, like Canada or Britain, seem to have the hard power to do so), thus any delay in the decline of Pax Americana can only be a good thing for supporters of liberty.
I am somewhat stunned to only learn now that Britain, at the height of its powers in the late 19th century, was the world's largest creditor and heavily financed the US trade deficit. I had always vaguely assumed that history would have mirrored the present - that the world hegemon, since it has the world's most advanced economy, could afford to spend more than it earns, and thus run trade deficits. And how come Britain, the issuer of the global reserve currency at the time, did not need to run persistent trade deficits to provide global liquidity? Not to shift blame (for I have no one but myself to blame for my own ignorance), but I see this as another instance of modern econ degrees only teaching contrived math and not crucial facts, either contemporary or historical, of the world economy.