To: carranza2 who wrote (76741 ) 7/25/2011 9:08:04 PM From: wallshot Read Replies (1) | Respond to Thanks for the link. I watched the first lecture and will loop back at some point and take a look at the second lecture.Capitalism: Success, Crisis and Reform oyc.yale.edu "This is a time period when — the skyscraper was really born in the 1890s, and really got going in the early part of the twentieth century. So a question that we've begun to ask ourselves is, maybe the skyscraper was a response to the emergence of a new capital market for fixed income securities. Maybe the financing drove the desire for big buildings rather than the other way around. I mean New York and other cities had existed for a long time without skyscrapers and there's a lot of interesting theory about how skyscrapers were kind of a result of changes in zoning laws in some places and so forth. But if you think about it, London did fine without skyscrapers for many years. Paris, London, other great capitals of the world did fine without skyscrapers. Why would you suddenly have these sort of immediate blossoming of skyscrapers largely coincident with an emergence of a capital market and ability to sell these bonds?" Will Goetzmann
