lawrence_summers

From "Why We Can't Cut Government Spending," a column in today's Washington Post by economist Lawrence Summers, the former Clinton Treasury secretary and former president of Harvard:

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity.

Discuss.

Comments:


Austin Murrey
Joined
Nov '11
Austin Murrey

 

Peter Robinson

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity.

Discuss. · · 2 minutes ago

I suspect that my "reasonable" view of the state's responsibility and Dr. Summers are quite different, rendering a discussion moot.  You have to have a common basis in at least theory to discuss something rationally after all.

If you ask me the only reason we can't cut government spending is because some people never got over the fact that they didn't have all the same toys as their friends when they were children.

Edited on August 20, 2012 at 8:51pm
Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

When Harvard's endowment fund is wiped out by a massive redistribution of wealth to ease the student debt burden and bring racial harmony through extensive cuts to the severance payments and speaking fees of its former President then we can talk:

Most of our information about Summers comes from his mandatory government disclosure form. Summers' 2009 disclosure form stated his net worth to be $17m-$39m. His total earnings in the year prior to joining the government were almost $8m. Goldman Sachs paid him $135,000 for one speech.

Summers is a compromised man who owes most of his fortune and much of his political success to the financial services industry, and who was involved in some of the most disastrous economic policy decisions of the past half century. In the Obama administration, Summers opposed strong measures to sanction bankers or curtail their income.

Harvard still does not require Summers to disclose his financial-sector involvements. Both Harvard and Summers declined my requests for information.

Songwriter
Joined
Aug '10
Songwriter

So, Larry Summers gets to say  which views are "reasonable" and which ones are not? Why can't I do that? I'm a pretty smart guy. Nice, too. I stay out of trouble and I keep my yard in decent shape.

Who the heck made Larry Summers arbiter of reasonableness? 

The smugness of guys like him really irks me.

Demaratus
Joined
Sep '10
Demaratus

"[O]n almost any reasonable view [so anyone thinking otherwise is unreasonable?] of the state’s responsibility [which includes wealth distribution why?], large increases in inequality [what is inequality and why is it bad?]  such as those observed in recent years [why are these econometric models not flawed in measuring inequality?] should [why?] call forth increased government activity [how can the government actually decrease inequality?]."

How can one person pack so many highly contentious assumptions into just one sentence?  The man is living in a bubble of groupthink.

Wylee Coyote
Joined
Jul '10
Wylee Coyote

Well, then I guess we're screwed.  'Cause we can't tax our way out of this mess.

Didn't Summers get in a lot of trouble a while back for suggesting that other people weren't good at math?

mask
Joined
Aug '12
mask

"large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity."

Is there anything which doesn't prompt a liberal to demand increased government activity.

To paraphrase Reagan regarding big government advocates:

If it moves tax it, if it keeps moving regulate, if it stops moving subsidize it.

SooperMexican
Joined
Jan '11
SooperMexican

It is not in America's mainstream tradition to have one of the responsibilities of government be to ensure wealth equality.  It has been since the founding, a primary responsibility of government to ensure personal freedom and the right of all to pursue happiness. On almost any reasonable view of American government policy, the latter should always supersede the former.

From a practical point of view, government spending has skyrocketed "in those recent years" that he is referring to, so reason should rather make one conclude that government spending doesn't decrease inequality, even if that were the proper role of government. Which it isn't.

mask
Joined
Aug '12
mask

When government "fixes" income - or any - "inequality" it does not have the effect of producing prosperity that larger numbers of people enjoy but rather the effect of creating more dependency shackling those who strive to create general prosperity.

ConservativeWanderer
Joined
Jun '12
ConservativeWanderer

Peter Robinson

From "Why We Can't Cut Government Spending," a column in today'sWashington Post by economist Lawrence Summers, the former Clinton Treasury secretary and former president of Harvard:

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity.

Discuss. · · 20 minutes ago

I am sure that in view of such large increases in inequality Mr. Summers will gladly donate enough of his fortune to the poor for his household to be firmly in the middle of the "middle class."

Until he does, however, this is just more "do as I say, not as I do."


Joined
May '12
Erik B

Peter Robinson

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity.

You quoted it backwards I think.

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in government activity  such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased inequality.

There, fixed it.

mask
Joined
Aug '12
mask

What about the "fairness" of straddling my young kids with debt they will spend the rest of their lives trying to pay off?

If I were a parent who lived way beyond my means - buying a large house, expensive cars, computers etc claiming it was to provide a better life for my kids then died and left them with enormous debts to pay back I'd rightly be called a bad parent.  When the government does this same thing we're told it's benevolent and compassionate.

KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville

Our current "inequality" is not a result of rich people hoarding money out of greed. It's a result of investors who calculate that they can't make enough money to justify the risks of investing. So when government experts start recommending more taxes, more regulation (i.e., more "government activity"), they unwittingly make investors less confident of investing.

As a result, these "helpful" experts exacerbate the problem they claim to be trying to solve.

Edited on August 20, 2012 at 9:16pm
Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

A married friend of mine is loaded with debt.  His home is double mortgaged.  His wallet is full of credit cards, all of which carry substantial balances.

My friend claims not to enjoy racking up debt.  He doesn't seem to think he has a choice.  He pays the tuition of his college aged children, and he supports his family in a comfortable lifestyle.  His children take private art and music lessons, and he pays the rent of his unemployed nephew.  But as much as he desires to love his children, he isn't doing them any favors.
Eventually, for my friend, the debts will come due.  When they do, his children will be in a difficult place. Never having sacrificed, they haven’t built or savedmoney, or prepared for financial independence.  My friend’s imprudence will cripple no one more severely than his children.

New Archbishop of Denver, Sam Aquila


Joined
Sep '10
Patrick in Albuquerque

I'd like to point out that there is (at least) one government activity that should be encouraged: Adoption of tax policies that will encourage re-shoring.

The King Prawn
Joined
Dec '10
The King Prawn
KC Mulville: As a result, these "helpful" experts exacerbate the problem they claim to be trying to solve. · 1 minute ago

You should probably macro that. It's applicable to every instance of government activity.

danys
Joined
Jan '11
danys

I thought of this, too.

Pseudodionysius

A married friend of mine is loaded with debt.  His home is double mortgaged.  His wallet is full of credit cards, all of which carry substantial balances.

My friend claims not to enjoy racking up debt.  He doesn't seem to think he has a choice.  He pays the tuition of his college aged children, and he supports his family in a comfortable lifestyle.  His children take private art and music lessons, and he pays the rent of his unemployed nephew.  But as much as he desires to love his children, he isn't doing them any favors.
Eventually, for my friend, the debts will come due.  When they do, his children will be in a difficult place. Never having sacrificed, they haven’t built or savedmoney, or prepared for financial independence.  My friend’s imprudence will cripple no one more severely than his children.

New Archbishop of Denver, Sam Aquila· 0 minutes ago

Frozen Chosen
Joined
Aug '10
Frozen Chosen

Lawrence Summers is the very definition of a pointy headed liberal academic - in other words, someone who has no connection to the real world and shouldn't be within a 1,000 miles of any government position.

ConservativeWanderer
Joined
Jun '12
ConservativeWanderer
Frozen Chosen: Lawrence Summers is the very definition of a pointy headed liberal academic - in other words, someone who has no connection to the real world and shouldn't be within a 1,000 miles of any government position. · 1 minute ago

William F. Buckley once said:

I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

Lawrence Summers just proved the wisdom of WFB.

Jim  Ixtian
Joined
May '12
Jim Ixtian

Like Paul Krugman, Larry Summers has made so many comments that are bizarre it has become impossible to catalog them all. More often Summer's comments reveal his intellectual and moral bankruptcy;

Poor countries should be the world's dumpster. Back in December 1991, when he(Summers) was the World Bank's chief economist, Summers sent out a memo extolling the virtues of treating less-developed countries (LDC) as global dumping grounds. It read in part:

1) The measurements of the costs of health impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality. From this point of view a given amount of health impairing pollution should be done in the country with the lowest cost, which will be the country with the lowest wages. I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that....

The following was the best response to Mr. Summers;

...in February 1992, Brazil’s then-Secretary of the Environment Jose Lutzenburger wrote back to Summers: “Your reasoning is perfectly logical but totally insane…If the World Bank keeps you as vice president it will lose all credibility."

Edited on August 20, 2012 at 10:04pm
Michael Hussey
Joined
Mar '11
Michael Hussey

[O]n almost any reasonable view of the state’s responsibility, large increases in inequality such as those observed in recent years should call forth increased government activity.

to be fair:  this was not the thrust of his essay at all, it was really sort of a footnote to a four-part argument as to why it'll be difficult, and perhaps ill-advised, to reduce spending.

that said:  having recently finished (finally, after years of inexcusable delay!) Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict of Visions", I can see how he thinks his view of the state's responsibility is "reasonable".

you could call it an irreconcilable difference of opinion.  I prefer "he's wrong".


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In