yeah, Bretton-Woods - was so much more about a broader scope of bank regulation - to try control and stabilise investment and capital creation for the good of domestic businesses (ideally small businesses) across all international members of B-W.
Throwing all that regulation away - essentially led to over-concentration of unregulated financial power with little to no incentive (or requirement) for them to work in the domestic interests - all the great stuff that comes from that (and it really is great - for some people).
Couple that with the small govt-ism that came in in the late 70s and there's not even a state investment sector to prop up growth during recessions.
Its one of those things where they experiment with something really important and before it's even been tested for long enough, they whip out the safety net.
"We won't need that anyway once the banks are deregulated - they'll fly in and catch us when we fall - they're very fine people ." At least they'll catch us for long enough to sort out foreclosure/eviction and make sure borrowers take all the risk of asset price movement.
Pretty much jack-all to do with gold - that was done with in the 20s pretty much in all but name.
Wow, they're dumber than I thought if they think this makes their point.
Although then again, their general ideals have swayed the more mainstream of many large western governments and international financial institutions for 40-50 years.
So there must be something to this tactic of making a hotch-potch of random graphs.