To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Lawrence Summers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lawrence Summers
Summers in 2012
8th Director of the National Economic Council
In office
January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2011
PresidentBarack Obama
DeputyDiana Farrell
Jason Furman
Preceded byKeith Hennessey
Succeeded byGene Sperling
27th President of Harvard University
In office
July 1, 2001 – June 30, 2006
Preceded byNeil Rudenstine
Succeeded byDerek Bok
71st United States Secretary of the Treasury
In office
July 2, 1999 – January 20, 2001
PresidentBill Clinton
DeputyStuart E. Eizenstat
Preceded byRobert Rubin
Succeeded byPaul H. O'Neill
7th United States Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
In office
August 11, 1995 – July 2, 1999
PresidentBill Clinton
Preceded byFrank N. Newman
Succeeded byStuart E. Eizenstat
Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs
In office
April 5, 1993 – August 11, 1995
PresidentBill Clinton
Preceded byDavid Mulford
Succeeded byMichael Bruno
Chief Economist of the World Bank
In office
January 14, 1991 – January 14, 1993
PresidentBarber Conable
Lewis Thompson Preston
Preceded byStanley Fischer
Succeeded byMichael Bruno
Personal details
Born
Lawrence Henry Summers

(1954-11-30) November 30, 1954 (age 69)
New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.
Political partyDemocratic
Spouses
Victoria Perry
(m. 1984; div. 2003)
(m. 2005)
Children3
EducationMassachusetts Institute of Technology (BS)
Harvard University (MA, PhD)
Signature
Academic career
InstitutionHarvard University
London School of Economics
FieldMacroeconomics
School or
tradition
New Keynesian economics
Doctoral
advisor
Martin Feldstein
Doctoral
students
Alan Krueger, Kiminori Matsuyama, James R. Hines Jr., Rhee Chang-yong
AwardsJohn Bates Clark Medal (1993)
Information at IDEAS / RePEc
Academic background
ThesisAn asset price approach to the analysis of capital income taxation (1982)
Doctoral advisorMartin Feldstein

Lawrence Henry Summers (born November 30, 1954) is an American economist who served as the 71st United States Secretary of the Treasury from 1999 to 2001 and as director of the National Economic Council from 2009 to 2010. He also served as president of Harvard University from 2001 to 2006,[1][2] where he is the Charles W. Eliot University Professor and director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard Kennedy School.[1][3][4] In November 2023, Summers joined the board of directors of artificial general intelligence company OpenAI.[5]

Summers became a professor of economics at Harvard University in 1983. He left Harvard in 1991, working as the Chief Economist of the World Bank from 1991 to 1993.[6][7][1] In 1993, Summers was appointed Under Secretary for International Affairs of the United States Department of the Treasury under President Bill Clinton's administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury.[7][1][8] While working for the Clinton administration, Summers played a leading role in the American response to the 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the Russian financial crisis. He was also influential in the Harvard Institute for International Development and American-advised privatization of the economies of the post-Soviet states, and in the deregulation of the U.S financial system, including the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

Following the end of Clinton's term, Summers served as the 27th president of Harvard University from 2001 to 2006. Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence vote by Harvard faculty, which resulted in large part from Summers's conflict with Cornel West, financial conflict of interest questions regarding his relationship with Andrei Shleifer, and a 2005 speech in which he offered three reasons for the under-representation of women in science and engineering, including the possibility that there exists a "different availability of aptitude at the high end", in addition to patterns of discrimination and socialization.[9]

After his departure from Harvard, Summers worked as a managing partner at the hedge fund D. E. Shaw & Co. Summers rejoined public service during the Obama administration, serving as the Director of the White House United States National Economic Council for President Barack Obama from January 2009 until November 2010, where he emerged as a key economic decision-maker in the Obama administration's response to the Great Recession.[7][1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    61 432
    6 573
    4 512
    1 852
    7 982
  • Lawrence Summers: Decoding the DNA of Education in Search of Actual Knowledge | Big Think
  • Lawrence Summers: What Kind of Inequality is OK? || American Conversation Essentials
  • A Conversation with Lawrence Summers
  • American Conversation Essentials: Lawrence Summers on Inequality
  • In Conversation with Professor Lawrence H. Summers

Transcription

Hi.  My name is Larry Summers and I'm glad to be with you.  I'm doing something a little different than most of the other classes in this series.  Rather than talking about a specific area of knowledge, rather than talking about my field of economics, I'm going to talk about knowledge in general, talk about Universities, talk about ideas and talk about their importance. Since it's going to be a personal prospective, I thought I'd begin by just saying a little bit about my background.  I grew up in an academic family of economist; became an economist, was a professor of economics at MIT and Harvard, then went into government working at the World Bank in the United States Government, and ultimately becoming secretary of the treasury, then served as Harvard's president for five controversial years between 2001 and 2006.  I went back to being a professor, then served as President Obama's Chief Economic Advisor for the first two years of his administration.   That gives me a perspective on universities, I think and a perspective on life beyond universities.  It gives me also the perspective of an economist and the perspective, more generally of a social scientist.  I think that's something very important and it's something I want to emphasize.  If you think about a high school education, you study English, you study literature, you study music, you study art.  If you think about a high school education, you study biology, you study chemistry, you study physics.  But you don't study social science in the same way.  You don't learn about scientific approaches to how societies function and how societies operate.  And part of what I'm going to try to convince you of today is that such approaches have greatly enhanced their understanding that understanding them better is hugely important for your future.   Before I say anything else, I want to say something about my philosophy of education and my philosophy about why what we do in universities is so profoundly important.  And I'll illustrate it with this story.   Some years ago, I was fortunate enough to receive an honorary degree from one of America's great Universities and of course, the president of that university gave the commencement speech.  It was a very very good speech.  At one point, the president said, "and the great thing about our university is we consider every subject, we discuss every question, we look at every kind of evidence, we focus on every approach to analysis.  And out of that dialogue, out of that debate, comes" and then the sentence was completed "a greater understanding of each other's perspective."  And I felt very let down when I heard that.  Because I thought what came out of considering every argument debating every question, looking at every kind of evidence was a closer approximation to truth.  And out of a closer approximation to truth, came better understanding of our world.  And out of better understanding of our world, came a better world.  And so it is my strongest conviction that the reason what you are engaged in is so important is because understanding, getting closer to truth, progress is the most important thing there is for making lives better for all our people.   I want to talk about three things today.  First, I want to talk about the importance of ideas, the importance of intellectual life.  Second, I want to talk about the importance of some of the trends that are defining our time.  I'm going to do that by posing a question that we can't know the answer to but that we can guess at.  What will historians say about our time 250 years from now?  And third, I want to take a perspective on what all this means for your education, what all this means for the work of universities and colleges.   Think about what is remembered of any society in the longest run.  Does anyone remember who ruled England when Chaucer wrote or when Milton wrote or when Shakespeare wrote or even when Dickens wrote?  Their names will be remembered long after any political rulers name is remembered.  Does anyone know who ruled France while the Great Impressionist created their work?  Isaac Newton's name will be remembered far longer than any person of wealth or fortune.  Einstein's reconceptualization   of the universe likely will last longer than almost any monument than anyone constructs to themselves or to any triumph.  As the Harvard scholar, Helen Veldlar wrote, it is for the works of creation that ultimately civilizations are remembered.  And so it is ultimately when one takes the longest view the kinds of ideas that you were exposed to in this course.  The kind of ideas that you will be exposed to in the remainder of your education that are most important. But of course, for most of us it is not conceivable that we are gonna create a sonnet like Shakespeare did or a painting like Picasso did.  But what is it that shapes the way our nations function?  The decisions our nations make that can affect the lives of millions of people?  Now John Kennedy was not a typical Harvard undergraduate and he certainly didn't have a typical post Harvard career.  He did write an undergraduate thesis.  It was entitled, "Why England Slept."  He had a father who was very ambitious for him; he had access to help from journalists.  He published that thesis under the title Why England Slept and it was basically a vicious critique of Chamberlain’s errors of appeasing Hitler at Munich.   That set of ideas shaped U.S. foreign policy for over a generation.  The lessons John Kennedy learned about international relations, the research he did helped shape his approaches to how, as President of the United States, he would protect America’s national security.  He learned important lessons about restraint and but for his wisdom, the Cuban Missile Crisis could have ended in conflagration.  He learned important lessons about resolve, about avoiding the appearance of appeasement and some believe that those contributed to the tragic errors of America’s entry into the Vietnam War.   You can debate the particular substance of the lessons he learned.  What you cannot debate is that it was his ideas.  His ideas learned from his education that shaped the direction of our nation.   In much the same way, economists today, presidents today debate our great recession, they debate how best to drive our economy forward.  They take it as a given that their objective is to raise something called the GDP, the Gross Domestic Product.  You know, it wasn’t always thus.  People didn’t know there was such a thing as the GDP a hundred years ago until it was conceptualized by economic research, taught to generations of students.  Generations of students learned that demand had a great deal to do with what happened to economies.   It says something that the works of the great British economist, John Maynard Keynes were taught in Harvard and Yale in the 1950’s, but alumni protested that they were a communist plot.  And just 20 years later, Richard Nixon, one of our most conservative presidents declared that we are all Keynesian now.  To be sure, the world moved away from Keynes’ doctrines as economies changed in the 1980’s and 1990’s, and now with the current downturn, they’re moving back in those directions.  Again, the specifics don’t matter, what does matter is the basic idea that it is ideas; it is what becomes conventional wisdom that shapes the choices of nations.   I started by talking about how civilizations are remembered.  Then I talked about what shapes the course of nations.  How about the ways in which ordinary life is carried on.  What is it that is done by businesses?  What is it that is done by individuals?  We take it for granted in our lives that there are things that happen consciously and things that happen unconsciously.  One hundred and fifty years ago, there was no idea of the unconscious until Freud developed such an idea.  Five hundred years ago, there was no idea of childhood as we now conceive it.  Children were thought of as miniature adults.  This is life-changing because of ideas.   Activities that people think of as the most mundane are revolutionized by intellectual sophistication.  The example I like to give is Major League Baseball.  For a hundred years, until about a decade ago, baseball teams chose their players by hiring scouts.  Sending former baseball players out to watch people play baseball and pick up and try to recruit strapping, strong-looking, young guys.  There is still some of that, but now, any successful team drafts based on careful statistical analysis.  They’ve found all sorts of patterns that had never been noticed before having to do with what kinds of players play well and what kinds of players play less well.  It was driven by inspiration and the product of that inspiration was competition.  Baseball makes progress; stores make progress in how they sell things.  We don’t think of it as a source of knowledge or as a great innovation, but I would suggest to you that the idea of the double blind experiment, the idea that you test a medical therapy by giving it to some people, not giving it to other people and doing a controlled experiment is one of the most important innovations in medicine that took place during the 20th century.   Thought, evidence, ideas, change, progress.  It’s not just at the civilizational level.  It’s not just at the level of whole nations.  But it’s at the level of successful organizations of every kind.   And then there is, of course, the individual and what determines how successful individuals are.  And here too, the evidence is strong and the world has changed.  The economic return to being better educated is far greater than it was even a generation ago.  Look at the difference in income between college graduates and high school graduates.  But it’s not only the economic return.  The gap in life expectancy between those with more education and those with less education has doubled as more and more practices have been discovered that the educated can follow, that improve their health and improve their well being.   It’s more difficult to gauge life satisfaction, but increasingly psychologists are finding ways of measuring happiness and they’re finding that those who are better educated enjoy more satisfying lives as well.   So if you look at it at every level, we’re finding that ideas, understanding, comprehension, their contribution to progress are becoming that much more important.  Indeed, I would suggest to you that if one wanted to describe how the world or at least large parts of the world had changed over the last 60 years, it has been a movement from a work that is governed by the idea of authority to a world that is governed much more by the authority of ideas.  And such a world carries with it staggering potential, but only potential for those who grasp, who use, who cherish and who develop ideas.   What will people look back on when they look back on our time 200 or 250 years ago, from now? What are some of the ideas that shape our time?  There’s a way of getting at that question.  Let’s try to think about what a historian 250 years from now will say about this quarter century or this half century that we are right now in the middle of.  It won’t actually say that much, if you think about it, we, most of us, can’t distinguish in a terribly sharp way what happened between 1675 and 1700 from what happened between 1700 and 1725.  But I think there are some things that they’re likely to note.  Now to be sure, there could be catastrophic events.  If global climate change is not contained or managed in some way, how that story plays out could be the defining feature of history.   If nuclear proliferation has the consequences that some fear, some kind of nuclear conflagration could be what people remember from our time.  But those, it doesn’t seem to me would be the things one would expect.  And instead there are three aspects of the world all in the main favorable, all in the main reflecting the power of ideas that are, I believe going to be the legacy of our time.   First, we now are headed for a truly global progressing economy and society.  If you look at economic history, what you see is that there was essentially no progress through most of the history of humanity.  Scholars debate vigorously and bitterly whether the standards of living in London in 1800 were the same as they had been in the Athens of Pericles or whether that they were 50 percent greater, whether perhaps even they were 100 percent greater.  But even if they were 100 percent greater, a doubling of standards of living over 2,300 years works out to a negligible annual growth rate.   The reason they called it the Industrial Revolution, was that for the first time in all of human history, progress started at a rate where it was noticeable within a human lifespan.  For the first time in all of human history, at the end of the human lifespan, the conditions of life, the conditions of existence were importantly different than they had been at the beginning of a human lifetime.  Why did the Industrial Revolution happen in England in 1800 rather than in Brazil in 2000 or in China or India in 1200?  That’s a matter of much debate and much analysis. Was it an accident?  Are there deep reasons?  These are matters that are extensively debated.   But what is not debated is that the Industrial Revolution had to do with the application of scientific ideas to the basic tasks of growing food, making clothing, providing shelter.  What’s not in doubt is that the Industrial Revolution was propelled forward by innovations which were the product of thinking human beings, incentivized to develop better ways of doing things.  What is not in doubt is that the Industrial Revolution benefited from emulation and imitation.  That good ideas were carried out not just by the person who had them, but by others who saw them being carried out and emulated success.  And what is not in doubt is that competition, argument, debate, trial and error pushed all of that forward.   But the Industrial Revolution, as great as it was, led to growth rates of income, of growth changes in standards of living of perhaps one percent a year, perhaps slightly more.  Over the course of a human lifespan, which in those days was only 40 years, living standards might rise 40, perhaps 50 percent.  That was unprecedented and unimaginable relative to anything that had come before.  But it was very little compared to what was to come.   As the Industrial Revolution spread across Europe, as America proved to be particularly innovative, particularly successful in applying technology, to have a culture that particularly rewarded those who were prepared to do new things in new ways.  You saw progress in the United States at the end of the 19th century that was considerably faster, perhaps twice as fast, perhaps even a little more than twice as fast as had ever been seen in Britain during the Industrial Revolution.   And so it was possible to imagine around the turn of the century that living standards in the United States would rise by a factor of three or by a factor of four over the course of a human lifespan.  That too was an immense achievement and it was the reason that the United States emerged as a power, a great power in the first half of the 20th century.   Now think about what has happened in China, in India, in other parts of the world.  Growth rates not of one percent of two percent or three percent, but growth rates of seven percent or eight percent or nine percent.  Einstein is said to have said, that compound interest is the most power force known to man.  At seven percent a year growth, a quantity doubles in 10 years.  Think about what seven percent growth means for an economy.  It means doubling in one decade and then doubling in the next decade.  It means that with a 70-year lifespan, it is imaginable that living standards would differ by more than a factor of 100 from where they were when a person was born, at the end of a human lifespan.  It means that in a decade, an individual goes from walking to having a bicycle, in another decade a motorcycle, in another decade to an automobile.  It means that areas that on photographs 30 years ago were green rice fields, large gleaming cities are built today.  It means that at one point, one in six sky cranes on planet earth were in Shanghai.   And this is not a matter of something that is happening in one corner of the globe.   Close to one in five people on planet earth live in China and close to 40 percent of the population of our planet live in China and in India.  Why are they enjoying this profound rapid growth?  Again, the matter is studies and debated extensively.   But most people would accept that it has a great deal to do with their being prepared to open up and to emulate and to learn from economies, from companies from individuals who are producing in more sophisticated ways than they have.  Most people would accept that it has a great deal to do with a move to systems in which individuals have an opportunity to benefit from their own success.  You know, it has been said that no one every washed a rented car.  And it captures an important truth that when people own things, when people get the fruits of success, they work harder to produce success.   As those societies have opened up to learn from the rest of the world, as those societies have moved to systems where individuals can share in success, the results have been more rapid growth than the world has ever seen.  Now that growth will not continue forever.  Much of the growth comes from convergence.  It comes from catching up and after you grow fast enough, long enough, there’s no longer for you to catch up.  With standards of living in China still where they were in the United States in the 1920’s, there is substantial room for this progress to continue.   There is no guarantee that it will continue though.  Environmental challenges, the challenges of avoiding the kind of financial problems that set back the United States during the Depression.  The challenges of maintaining a political system that is on the one hand authoritarian and based on central control along with an economy that depends on information being disseminated widely will be a great one for the Chinese.  The challenges of engaging with the rest of the world on very different terms than has been the case historically will be a great one for the Chinese and for the Indians as they prosper.   No one can say how this story will end.  But we know enough to know that it will be a very big story of our time.  We know enough to know that it is a story that is about progress through knowledge.  And we know enough to know that if you want to be part, fully of the adventure of our times, it’s a story you want to understand and be part of.   There’s a second thing, a second aspect of this time that will be remembered for a very long time to come.  And that is the revolution that is underway in the sciences.  Especially in the information sciences and the life sciences and the way in which we bring them together.   You know, if you think about it, through much of history, medicine has proceeded as much by luck and trial and error as anything else.  Fleming found Penicillin more or less by accident as a mold.  Jenner found the Small Pox Vaccine by stumbling on something with cattle.  We are now at the brink of a very different approach to understanding human health and to improving the human condition.  For the first time, we have sequenced in the last decade, the human genome.  The map that describes our common humanity.  It’s a code that’s written in four letters, ATC and G, the basis that are part of DNA.  And here’s the kind of understanding we have.  You can think of the human genome as a book of several million pages.  If you go to page 2,600,453, you go down 14 lines, you go over 11 spaces and you have a “T” instead of an “A” then you may well have cystic fibrosis.   That’s a kind of understanding of the disease process that is at an entirely different level of rigor than we’ve had before.  And it points to prospects for intervention, for change unlike any that we have seen before.  No one can know all that will be possible, but for the first time it is imaginable that we will find cures for dementia, that we will enable people to repair their hearts.  That we will stop labeling cancers by where they take place in the body and instead identify them by the type of tumor and have an appropriately targeted agent for each type of tumor.  These are likely to be years of remarkable progress in physical health, and they may be even more remarkable progress in mental health as we come to understand brain functioning better and better.   To be sure, these will involve difficult ethical questions.  The drugs that are taken by man on college campuses, even high school campuses today to help concentrate or pull all-nighters before exams point in the direction of what might be called mental steroids.  And as better and better mental steroids are developed, some of the same issues that arise with respect to physical competition are going to arise with respect to mental competition.   The process of medicine will be transformed just as information technology transforms what we think of as routine life.  Maybe it provides some perspective or maybe it will just make you think of me as ancient, but I remember very well giving a speech in Chicago in 1988 and I was to give a speech to a given group.  And a car picked me up at the airport to take me to my speech.  I got into the back seat of the car and there was a telephone in the back seat of the car.  And that was something so exciting to me that I called everyone I knew to say that I was in the backseat of a car with a telephone and they shared my excitement because it was that novel in 1988, just 23 years ago.   Today, more than half the people on earth have access to cell phones.  In large parts of the world, there will never be land line networks created.  Cell phones will simply be a leap frog technology.  And a leap frog technology that will be used in the way we are accustomed to thinking about cell phones.  To talk, to text, but also in large parts of the world, your bank account will reside on your cell phone; you will transfer money using your cell phone.  You will monitor your children using your cell phone and so forth.   We don’t know all the places that individuals will take information technology.  It was a revelation 40 years ago when sociologists formulated the observation of six degrees of separation.  When they formulated the observation that it was possible for people to be connected, almost any two people in the world with six links.  I know you, you know someone else, that person knows someone else and so forth.  That was a kind of theoretical possibility.  Now with social networks, people find their way along those chains and find their way very rapidly.   No one thought in 1960 the world would have use for as many as 100 computers.  The people who first found the copying machine didn’t see that it would be pervasively used because mimeograph was available.  We can’t yet know where the degree of connectivity that social networks make possible will take things.  But we can know that those effects are likely to be very, very large.   Notice that exponential growth has a special property.  Suppose I take the series of numbers, one, two, four, eight, 16, 32 and so forth.  Each number is twice the last, but 32 minus 16 is twice as much as 16 minus 8 and 64 minus 32 is twice as much as 32 minus 16.  It’s a feature of exponential growth, of steady percentage growth that the increment of change that takes place gets larger and larger each year.  And that’s what happens with knowledge.  As we know more and more, even if each bit of knowledge is expanded at the same rate, the total accretion to knowledge each year becomes that much greater.  And that’s why we are likely to see as much scientific progress in the next quarter century as we’ve seen in the entire previous century.   Now these are not unrelated development that I am talking about here.  This scientific and technical progress and these changes in standards of living that I have just described.  Precisely the reason we are able to see more rapid progress than ever before is because there is more technological progress, more that can be emulated than ever before.   So far, when I’ve talked about what people will look at when they look at our time, I have emphasized what in a sense is external to the individual, external to the human heart.  I talked about rapid growth in some parts of the world and all that that may mean for the global system.  I’ve talked about progress in science and technology.  There’s another difference, and it’s a difference that has been underway for many, many years, but it also may be accelerating.  And that is and ever widening sphere of human concern and human compassion.   Think about the fact that a half century ago, at the places where you might be likely to listen to this tape, there would have been very, very few African-American students, in some, there might have been no African-American students.  Institutions like Harvard and Yale did not have women students and even allied colleges had numbers of women that were a quarter of the number of men who were studying.  Homosexuality was a crime in every one of the 50 states and the idea that gay soldiers could fight in the military, whether gay people could be married would have been an inconceivable kind of notion.  Th e idea that those with mental illness had rights to be involved in shaping their care, the idea that those with serious medical illness had the right to be told what their condition was, none of these were norms in our society.   The set of concepts that we were prepared to accept as objects of our sympathy was far more limited than it was today.  Here’s a great question that I hope you will all think about.  It was asked of my daughter as we sat at a dinner in Washington.  A guy asked my daughter, he said, “Ruth, 150 years ago, sitting in this room, we took slavery as absolutely natural and for granted.  And yet sitting here now, it seems inconceivable and barbaric that we would accept the institution of slavery.  A hundred years ago, we took capital punishment; we took flogging for kids who were out of line as absolutely natural.  And that seems inconceivable today.  It is unlikely,” he said, and I think he was right, “that we have reached some apex of civilization now.  What is it that we do that seems natural to us that will seem barbaric 100 years from now?”  I don’t know what the answer to that is.  Perhaps it is aspects of the way we treat the poor or the very young or the very old.  Perhaps it has to do with the ways in which we treat animals.  Perhaps it has to do with the ways in which superstition continues to shape our approaches to important human problems.  I don’t know the answer, but it would be very surprising if there are not important aspects of how we live today that will shock the consciences of those who look back on us just as our consciences are shocked by those who came before.  And what will change those consciences?  It will be individuals, it will be protests, it will be ideas, it will be philosophies, it will be better thinking than the thinking that came before.   This is the reason you are here in a university.  You are here to be educated.  You are here to understand thinking better and to think better yourself.  It’s not a chance you’re going to have throughout your lifetime.  Believe me, you will have a job, it will be enormously fulfilling, but it will come with a set of tasks, some of it will be about thinking, but all of it won’t be about thinking.  But for the next few years, you have a chance to focus on thinking.   I think about some of the students who I’ve had a chance to know over the years who took advantages of their opportunities in a university.  One of the stories I always like to tell is of a freshman seminar that I had a chance to teach at Harvard when I was president of the university.  I taught a seminar on globalization, some of the issues I just referred to actually.  And I assigned a reading that I had written, a lecture that I had given to the American Economic Association when I was the United States Treasury Secretary, about global capital flows.  And as I did each week, I asked one of the students to introduce the readings.   And this young man in October of his freshman year said something like the following.  “The reading by President Summers on the flow of capital across countries, it was kind of interesting, but the data did not come close to supporting the conclusions.”  And I thought to myself, what a fantastic thing this was.  In how many human institutions that have ever existed could somebody who had been there for five weeks, tell the person who had the title, “President,” that he didn’t really know what he was talking about and have nobody even to find it very surprising.  And it was a special moment.   Now, I don’t want to be misunderstood.  I explained to my student that I actually thought he was rather more confused than I was and I argued back, but what was really most important about that was the universities stand out as places that really are about the authority of ideas.  You see it in faculty members who are pleased when their students make a discovery that undermines a cherished theory that they had put forward.  You see it when professors will suggest topics to students, but they like it best when students find their own topics to write about, to think about, to study about.   You are embarked in a university where it is the authority of ideas that is going to be most important and it is up to you whether like that student in my seminar, you choose to pursue your own ideas to put them forward and do so with your convictions.   I think of another student I had who came to me one morning, one evening actually, walked into my office and said that I had written a pretty good paper, but that it had five important mistakes and that he wanted a job.  You could debate whether they actually were mistakes, but you couldn’t debate that young man’s hunger to learn.  You could not debate that that young man was someone who wanted to make a difference in economics and he is today a professor of economics.  And his works are more cited as an economist than any other economist in the world.   I think of a young woman who studied economics, whose interests were never in economics as an abstraction, whose interests were never in the theory of economics, but whose interests were in how using this knowledge, you could help to make the world a better place.  She came to me wanting to write an undergraduate thesis on a topic that might not have seemed natural for an economist.  Her topic was “Spousal Abuse,” and the economics of spousal abuse.  And her theory was that when spouses were better educated, when they were less dependent when they were more able to pursue their own opportunities, they had more bargaining power, they were better able to leave a difficult situation and so you would have less abuse.  So she collected data and she proved that that theory was right.  She supported her conviction that insistence on strength was very important for women.  Her name was Cheryl Sandberg, and today she is the Chief Operating Officer of Facebook.  And her ideas, her willingness to look at data to decide what is true is helping to guide that network that is reaching some 700 million people.   I can give more examples like those of Cheryl or Andre Schleifer, of people who set a direction and a pattern as they were students that then shaped the rest of their lives. But the students who are most successful, the students that get the most out of their education are not the ones who copy someone else’s path.  They’re the ones that set their own path.  But the paths that matter most are the paths that involve better understanding ideas, putting forth ideas, urging one’s own ideas while being prepared to change one’s mind in the face of evidence and recognizing that we all have a chance to be part of the story as the world evolves from a world governed by the idea of authority to a much better world governed by the authority of ideas.   

Early life and education

Summers was born in New Haven, Connecticut, on November 30, 1954, into a Jewish family. He was the son of two economists, Robert Summers (who changed the family surname from Samuelson) and Anita Summers (of Romanian-Jewish ancestry), who were both professors at the University of Pennsylvania. He is also the nephew of two Nobel laureates in economics: Paul Samuelson (brother of Robert Summers) and Kenneth Arrow (brother of Anita Arrow Summers). He spent most of his childhood in Penn Valley, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia, where he attended Harriton High School.

At age 16,[10] he entered Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he originally intended to study physics but soon switched to economics, graduating in 1975. He was also an active member of the MIT debating team and qualified for participation in the annual National Debate Tournament three times. He attended Harvard University as a graduate student, receiving his Ph.D. in 1982.[11] In 1983, at age 28, Summers became one of the youngest tenured professors in Harvard's history. He was a visiting academic at the London School of Economics in 1987.[12]

Career

Academic economist

Summers in 1990

As a researcher, Summers has made important contributions in many areas of economics, primarily public finance, labor economics, financial economics, and macroeconomics. Summers has also worked in international economics, economic demography, economic history and development economics.[13] He received the John Bates Clark Medal in 1993 from the American Economic Association.[14] In 1987, he was the first social scientist to win the Alan T. Waterman Award from the National Science Foundation. Summers is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences. Some of his popular courses today, as Charles W. Eliot University Professor at Harvard University, include American Economic Policy and The Political Economy of Globalization.[15]

Public official

Summers was on the staff of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Reagan in 1982–1983. He also served as an economic adviser to the Dukakis Presidential campaign in 1988.

Chief Economist at the World Bank

Summers left Harvard in 1991 and served as Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist for the World Bank until 1993.[6][7][1]

According to the World Bank's Data & Research office (March 2017), Summers returned to Washington, D.C. in 1991 as the World Bank's Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist. As such, Summers played a "key role" in designing strategies to aid developing countries, worked on the bank's loan committee, guided the bank's research and statistics operations, and guided external training programs.[6]

The World Bank's official site also reports that Summer's research included an "influential" report that demonstrated a very high return from investments in educating girls in developing nations.[6]

According to The Economist, Summers was "often at the centre of heated debates" about economic policy, to an extent exceptional for the history of the World Bank in recent decades.[16]

"Dirty industries" controversy

In December 1991, while at the World Bank, Summers signed a memo that was leaked to the press. Lant Pritchett has claimed authorship of the private memo, which both he and Summers say was intended as sarcasm.[17] The memo stated that "the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that.[17] ... I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly underpolluted."[18] According to Pritchett, the memo, as leaked, was doctored to remove context and intended irony, and was "a deliberate fraud and forgery to discredit Larry and the World Bank."[19][17]

Service in the Clinton Administration

Summers as United States Secretary of the Treasury

In 1993, Summers was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs and later in the United States Department of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury.

Much of Summers's tenure at the Treasury Department was focused on international economic issues. He was deeply involved in the Clinton administration's effort to bail out Mexico and Russia when those nations had currency crises.[20] Summers set up a project through which the Harvard Institute for International Development provided advice to the Russian government between 1992 and 1997. Later there was a scandal when it emerged that some of the Harvard project members had invested in Russia and were therefore not impartial advisors.[21] Summers encouraged then-Russian leader Boris Yeltsin to use the same "three-'ations'" of policy he advocated in the Clinton Administration – "privatization, stabilization, and liberalization."[22]

Summers pressured the Korean government to raise its interest rates and balance its budget in the midst of a recession, policies criticized by Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz.[23] According to the book The Chastening, by Paul Blustein, during this crisis, Summers, along with Paul Wolfowitz, pushed for regime change in Indonesia.[24]

Summers was a leading voice within the Clinton Administration arguing against American leadership in greenhouse gas reductions and against US participation in the Kyoto Protocol, according to internal documents made public in 2009.[25]

As Treasury Secretary, Summers led the Clinton Administration's opposition to tax cuts proposed by the Republican Congress in 1999.[26]

During the California energy crisis of 2000, then-Treasury Secretary Summers teamed with Alan Greenspan and Enron executive Kenneth Lay to lecture California Governor Gray Davis on the causes of the crisis, explaining that the problem was excessive government regulation.[27] Under the advice of Kenneth Lay, Summers urged Davis to relax California's environmental standards in order to reassure the markets.[28]

Summers hailed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which lifted more than six decades of restrictions against banks offering commercial banking, insurance, and investment services (by repealing key provisions in the 1933 Glass–Steagall Act): "Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century," Summers said.[29] "This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy."[29] Many critics, including President Barack Obama, have suggested the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis was caused by the partial repeal of the 1933 Glass–Steagall Act.[30] Indeed, as a member of President Clinton's Working Group on Financial Markets, Summers, along with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Arthur Levitt, Fed Chairman Greenspan, and Secretary Rubin, torpedoed an effort to regulate the derivatives that many blame for bringing the financial market down in Fall 2008.[31]

Views on financial regulation

On May 7, 1998, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued a Concept Release soliciting input from regulators, academics, and practitioners to determine "how best to maintain adequate regulatory safeguards without impairing the ability of the OTC (over-the-counter) derivatives market to grow and the ability of U.S. entities to remain competitive in the global financial marketplace."[32] On July 30, 1998, then-Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Summers testified before the U.S. Congress that "the parties to these kinds of contract are largely sophisticated financial institutions that would appear to be eminently capable of protecting themselves from fraud and counterparty insolvencies." At the time Summers stated that "to date there has been no clear evidence of a need for additional regulation of the institutional OTC derivatives market, and we would submit that proponents of such regulation must bear the burden of demonstrating that need."[33] In 1999 Summers endorsed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which removed the separation between investment and commercial banks, saying "With this bill, the American financial system takes a major step forward towards the 21st Century."[34]

When George Stephanopoulos asked Summers about the financial crisis in an ABC interview on March 15, 2009, Summers replied that "there are a lot of terrible things that have happened in the last eighteen months, but what's happened at A.I.G. ... the way it was not regulated, the way no one was watching ... is outrageous."[35]

In February 2009, Summers quoted John Maynard Keynes, saying "When circumstances change, I change my opinion", reflecting both on the failures of Wall Street deregulation and his new leadership role in the government bailout.[36] On April 18, 2010, in an interview on ABC's "This Week" program, Clinton said Summers was wrong in the advice he gave him not to regulate derivatives.[37]

President of Harvard

In 2001, when George W. Bush became President, Summers left the Treasury Department and returned to Harvard as its 27th president, serving from July 2001 until June 2006.[14] He was Harvard's first Jewish president,[38][39][40] though his predecessor Neil Rudenstine's father was Jewish.[41]

A number of Summers's decisions at Harvard have attracted public controversy, either at the time or since his resignation.

Cornel West affair

In an October 2001 meeting, Summers criticized African American Studies department head Cornel West for allegedly missing three weeks of classes to work on the Bill Bradley presidential campaign and complained that West was contributing to grade inflation. Summers also claimed that West's "rap" album was an "embarrassment" to the university. West pushed back strongly against the accusations.[42] "The hip-hop scared him. It's a stereotypical reaction", he said later. West, who later called Summers both "uninformed" and "an unprincipled power player" in describing this encounter in his book Democracy Matters (2004), subsequently returned to Princeton University, where he had taught prior to Harvard University.

Differences between the sexes

In January 2005, at a Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce sponsored by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Summers sparked controversy with his discussion of why women may have been underrepresented "in tenured positions in science and engineering at top universities and research institutions". The conference was designed to be off-the-record so that participants could speak candidly without fear of public misunderstanding or disclosure later.[43]

Summers had prefaced his talk, saying he was adopting an "entirely positive, rather than normative approach" and that his remarks were intended to be an "attempt at provocation".[44]

Summers then began by identifying three hypotheses for the higher proportion of men in high-end science and engineering positions:

  1. The high-powered job hypothesis
  2. Different availability of aptitude at the high end
  3. Different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search[44]

The second hypothesis, the generally greater variability among men (compared to women) in tests of cognitive abilities,[45][46][47] leading to proportionally more males than females at both the lower and upper tails of the test score distributions, caused the most controversy. In his discussion of this hypothesis, Summers said that "even small differences in the standard deviation [between genders] will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out [from the mean]".[44] Summers referenced research that implied differences between the standard deviations of males and females in the top 5% of twelfth graders under various tests. He then went on to argue that, if this research were to be accepted, then "whatever the set of attributes ... that are precisely defined to correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or being a chemist at Berkeley ... are probably different in their standard deviations as well".[44]

Summers then concluded his discussion of the three hypotheses by saying:

So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are, and working very hard to address them.[44]

Summers then went on to discuss approaches to remedying the shortage of women in high-end science and engineering positions.

This lunch-time talk drew accusations of sexism and careless scholarship, and an intense negative response followed, both nationally and at Harvard.[48] Summers apologized repeatedly.[49] Nevertheless, the controversy is speculated to have contributed to his resigning his position as president of Harvard University the following year, as well as costing Summers the job of Treasury Secretary in Obama's administration.[50]

Summers's protégée Sheryl Sandberg has defended him, saying that "Larry has been a true advocate for women throughout his career" at the World Bank and Treasury. Referring to the lunch talk, Sandberg said, "What few seem to note is that it is remarkable that he was giving the speech in the first place – that he cared enough about women's careers and their trajectory in the fields of math and science to proactively analyze the issues and talk about what was going wrong".[51]

In 2016, remarking upon political correctness in institutions of higher education, Summers said:

There is a great deal of absurd political correctness. Now, I'm somebody who believes very strongly in diversity, who resists racism in all of its many incarnations, who thinks that there is a great deal that's unjust in American society that needs to be combated, but it seems to be that there is a kind of creeping totalitarianism in terms of what kind of ideas are acceptable and are debatable on college campuses.[52]

Summers' opposition and support at Harvard

On March 15, 2005, members of the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences, which instructs graduate students in Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and undergraduates in Harvard College, passed 218–185 a motion of "lack of confidence" in the leadership of Summers, with 18 abstentions. A second motion that offered a milder censure of the president passed 253 to 137, also with 18 abstentions.

The members of the Harvard Corporation, the University's highest governing body, are in charge of the selection of the president and issued statements strongly supporting Summers.

FAS faculty were not unanimous in their comments against Summers. Psychologist Steven Pinker defended the legitimacy of Summers's January lecture. When asked if Summers's talk was "within the pale of legitimate academic discourse," Pinker responded "Good grief, shouldn't everything be within the pale of legitimate academic discourse, as long as it is presented with some degree of rigor? That's the difference between a university and a madrassa. There is certainly enough evidence for the hypothesis to be taken seriously."[53]

Summers had stronger support among Harvard College students than among the college faculty. One poll by The Harvard Crimson indicated that students opposed his resignation by a three-to-one margin, with 57% of responding students opposing his resignation and 19% supporting it.[54]

In July 2005, a board member of Harvard Corporation, Conrad K. Harper, resigned saying he was angered both by the university president's comments about women and by Summers being given a salary increase. The resignation letter to the president said, "I could not and cannot support a raise in your salary, ... I believe that Harvard's best interests require your resignation."[55][56]

Support of economist Andrei Shleifer

Harvard and Andrei Shleifer, a close friend and protégé of Summers, controversially paid $28.5 million to settle a lawsuit by the U.S. government over the conflict of interest Shleifer had while advising Russia's privatization program. The US government had sued Shleifer under the False Claims Act, as he bought Russian stocks while designing the country's privatization. In 2004, a federal judge ruled that while Harvard had violated the contract, Shleifer and his associate alone were liable for treble damages.

In June 2005, Harvard and Shleifer announced that they had reached a tentative settlement with the US government. In August, Harvard, Shleifer, and the Department of Justice reached an agreement under which the university paid $26.5 million to settle the five-year-old lawsuit. Shleifer was also responsible for paying $2 million worth of damages.

Because Harvard paid almost all of the damages and allowed Shleifer to retain his faculty position, the settlement provoked allegations of favoritism by Summers. His continued support for Shleifer strengthened Summers's unpopularity with other professors, as reported in The Harvard Crimson:

I've been a member of this Faculty for over 45 years, and I am no longer easily shocked," is how Frederick H. Abernathy, the McKay professor of mechanical engineering, began his biting comments about the Shleifer case at Tuesday's fiery Faculty meeting. But, Abernathy continued, "I was deeply shocked and disappointed by the actions of this University" in the Shleifer affair.[57]

In Russia

An 18,000-word article "How Harvard Lost Russia" in Institutional Investor by David McClintick detailed Shleifer's alleged efforts to use his inside knowledge of and sway over the Russian economy in order to make lucrative personal investments, all while leading a Harvard group, advising the Russian government, that was under contract with the U.S. The article suggests that Summers shielded his fellow economist from disciplinary action by the university, and it noted that Summers had forewarned Shleifer and his wife Nancy Zimmerman about the conflict-of-interest regulations back in 1996.[57][58] Summers's friendship with Shleifer was well known by the corporation when it selected him to succeed Rudenstine and Summers recused himself from all proceedings with Shleifer, whose case was actually handled by an independent committee led by former Harvard president Derek Bok.

Connection to Jeffrey Epstein

An article in The Harvard Crimson in 2003, during Summers's tenure as president, detailed a reportedly "special connection" between Summers and Jeffrey Epstein.[59] Epstein pledged to donate at least $25 million to Harvard during Summers's tenure to endow Harvard's Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, and Epstein was given an office at Harvard for his personal use.[60][61] Epstein otherwise had no formal connection to Harvard.[59] Summers's ties to Epstein reportedly began "a number of years...before Summers became Harvard's president and even before he was the Secretary of the Treasury."[59] Flight records introduced as evidence in the 2021 trial of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell show that Summers flew on Jeffrey Epstein's private plane on at least four occasions, including once in 1998 when Summers was United States Deputy Secretary of the Treasury and at least three times while Harvard president.[62] A charity funded by Epstein also donated to the production of a PBS show hosted by Summers's wife and Harvard professor Elisa New.[63]

Winklevoss twins and Facebook

In February 2004, the Winklevoss twins requested a meeting with Summers in order to ask him to intervene on their behalf in an ongoing dispute they had with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. The Winklevosses believed that Zuckerberg had stolen their idea for a social networking website and launched Facebook on his own, after they had asked him to be a part of their project, then called HarvardConnection. Summers believed that the matter was outside the university's jurisdiction and advised the twins to take their complaint to the courts.[64]

Resignation as Harvard President

On February 21, 2006, Summers announced his intention to step down at the end of the school year effective June 30, 2006. Harvard agreed to provide Summers on his resignation with a one-year paid sabbatical leave, subsidized a $1 million outstanding loan from the university for his personal residence, and provided other payments.[65] Former University President Derek Bok acted as Interim President while the University conducted a search for a replacement which ended with the naming of Drew Gilpin Faust on February 11, 2007.

Post-Harvard presidency career

President Barack Obama, on left, discusses with a group in the White House, including Larry Summers on far right (back to camera).

After a one-year sabbatical, Summers subsequently accepted Harvard University's invitation to serve as the Charles W. Eliot University Professor, one of 20 select University-wide professorships, with offices in the Kennedy School of Government and the Harvard Business School.[66] In 2006 he was also a member of the Panel of Eminent Persons which reviewed the work of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. He is a member in the Group of Thirty. He also currently serves on the Berggruen Institute's 21st Century Council and was part of a 2015 Berggruen-organized meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping.[67][68]

Business interests

On October 19, 2006, Summers was hired as a part-time managing director of the New York-based hedge fund D. E. Shaw & Co. for which he received $5 million in salary and other compensation over a 16-month period.[69] At the same time Summers earned $2.7 million in speaking fees from major financial institutions,[70] including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers.[71] Upon being nominated Treasury Secretary by President Clinton in 1999, Summers listed assets of about $900,000 and debts, including a mortgage, of $500,000.[70] By the time he returned in 2009 to serve in the Obama administration, he reported a net worth between $17 million and $39 million.[70] He is a former member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group.[72] In 2013, Summers became an early angel investor in India's first car rental company, Zoomcar, which was started by his former Harvard Teaching Fellow.[73]

National Economic Council

Upon the inauguration of Barack Obama as president in January 2009, Summers was appointed to the post of director of the National Economic Council.[74] In this position Summers emerged as a key economic decision-maker in the Obama administration, where he attracted both praise and criticism. There had been friction between Summers and former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, as Volcker accused Summers of delaying the effort to organize a panel of outside economic advisers, and Summers had cut Volcker out of White House meetings and had not shown interest in collaborating on policy solutions to the economic crisis.[75] On the other hand, Obama himself was reportedly thrilled with the work Summers did in his first few weeks on the job. And Peter Orszag, another top economic advisor, called Summers "one of the world's most brilliant economists."[76] According to Henry Kissinger Larry Summers should "be given a White House post in which he was charged with shooting down or fixing bad ideas."[77]

In January 2009, as the Obama Administration tried to pass an economic stimulus spending bill, Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR.) criticized Summers, saying that he thought that President Barack Obama is "ill-advised by Larry Summers. Larry Summers hates infrastructure."[78] DeFazio, along with liberal economists including Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, had argued that more of the stimulus should be spent on infrastructure,[79] while Summers had supported tax cuts.[80] In late 2008, Summers and economic advisors for then-President-elect Obama presented a memo with options for an economic stimulus package ranging from $550 billion to $900 billion.[81] According to The New Republic, economic advisor Christina Romer initially recommended a $1.8-trillion package, which proposal Summers quickly rejected, believing any stimulus approaching $1 trillion would not pass through Congress. Romer revised her recommendation to $1.2 trillion, which Summers agreed to include in the memo, but Summers struck the figure at the last minute.[82]

According to the Wall Street Journal, Summers called Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) asking him to remove caps on executive pay at firms that have received stimulus money, including Citigroup.[83]

On April 3, 2009, Summers came under renewed criticism after it was disclosed that he was paid millions of dollars the previous year by companies which he now had influence over as a public servant. He earned $5 million from the hedge fund D. E. Shaw and collected $2.7 million in speaking fees from Wall Street companies that received government bailout money.[84]

Post-NEC career

Summers with Volodymyr Groysman in Ukraine

Since leaving the NEC in December 2010, Summers has worked as an advisor to hedge fund D. E. Shaw & Co, Citigroup and the NASDAQ OMX Group while resuming his role as a tenured Harvard professor.[70] In June 2011 Summers joined the board of directors of Square, a company developing an electronic payment service,[85] and became a special adviser at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.[86] He joined the board of person-to-person lending company Lending Club in December 2012.[87] In July 2015 Summers joined the Board of Directors of Premise Data, a San Francisco-based data and analytics technology company that sources data from a global network of on-the-ground contributors.[88][89]

In April 2016, he was one of eight former Treasury secretaries who called on the United Kingdom to remain a member of the European Union ahead of the June 2016 Referendum.[90]

Summers referred to the United Kingdom's Brexit vote on June 23, 2016, in favor of leaving the European Union as the "worst self-inflicted policy wound that a country has done since the Second World War". However, Summers cautioned that the result was a "wake up call for elites everywhere" and called for "responsible nationalism" in response to simmering public sentiment.[91]

In June 2016, Summers also wrote, "I believe the risks to the US and global economies of Mr Trump's election as president are far greater [than passage of Brexit]. If he is elected, I would expect a protracted recession to begin within 18 months. The damage would be felt far beyond the United States."[92]

2020 presidential election

A coalition of progressive groups called on Joe Biden's 2020 presidential campaign no longer to use Summers as an advisor, after reports surfaced that Summers was advising the campaign on economic policy.[93] Progressive groups like the Sunrise Movement and Justice Democrats petitioned the campaign to disavow Summers, saying, "Summers's legacy is advocating for policies that contributed to the skyrocketing inequality and climate crisis we're living with today."[94] Following the outcry, Summers stated he would not be joining a future Biden administration, in the event that Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election.[95]

Candidacy for chairmanship of the Federal Reserve and governorship of the Bank of Israel

In 2013, Summers emerged as one of two leading candidates, along with Janet Yellen, to succeed Ben Bernanke as chair of the Federal Reserve. The possibility of his nomination created a great deal of controversy with some senators of both parties declaring opposition. On September 15, Summers withdrew his name from consideration for the position, writing: "I have reluctantly concluded that any possible confirmation process for me would be acrimonious and would not serve the interest of the Federal Reserve, the Administration or, ultimately, the interests of the nation's ongoing economic recovery."[96][97]

During the 2013, Summers had been reported as preferred candidate by the Cabinet of Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to succeed Stanley Fischer as governor of the Bank of Israel. Netanyahu personally asked him to take the post, an offer he turned down.[98][99]

Criticism of the Biden Administration, 2021

Summers emerged as an early opponent of President Joe Biden's economic policy, calling the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 "the least responsible macroeconomic policy we've had in the last 40 years" and arguing that it risked economic recession and market destabilization.[100]

Hamas-led attack on Israel

In October 2023, following the Hamas-led attack on Israel, several Harvard undergraduate student groups signed a letter condemning the Israeli state, and holding the "Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence".[101][102] This letter from Harvard University student groups blaming Israel drew a backlash from several prominent alumni and from Larry Summers, who said that he was "sickened" by it.[103] Summers, though agreeing with Bill Ackman on the need to look at employees' political views, called Ackman's request to release the names of all the students involved in signing the letter "the stuff of Joe McCarthy".[104] Summers has repeatedly criticized the Harvard administration for its failure to curb what he sees as rising antisemitism at the university since the Hamas attack.[105]

Personal life

Summers was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma around 1983, underwent treatment and has remained cancer-free.[citation needed] Summers has three children (older twin daughters Ruth and Pamela and son Harry) with his first wife, Victoria Joanne (Perry).[106][107] In December 2005, Summers married English professor Elisa New, who has three daughters (Yael, Orli and Maya) from a previous marriage. He lives in Brookline, Massachusetts.[108]

In popular culture

The 2010 film The Social Network, which deals with the founding of the social networking site Facebook, shows Summers (played by Douglas Urbanski), in his then-capacity as President of Harvard, meeting with Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss to discuss their accusations against Mark Zuckerberg.

In the 2010 documentary Inside Job, Summers is presented as one of the key figures behind the financial crisis of 2007–2008. Charles Ferguson points out the economist's role in what he characterizes as the deregulation of many domains of the financial sector.[109]

In The Simpsons episode "E My Sports" (S30 E17), first broadcast March 17, 2019, the character Principal Seymour Skinner looks at a $100 bill and remarks "$100 bill, autographed by Lawrence Summers. Such a carefree signature, before the great recession."

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f "Lawrence H. Summers," Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, retrieved March 31, 2017
  2. ^ "Historical Facts", Harvard University, retrieved March 31, 2017
  3. ^ [https://www.directory.harvard.edu/phonebook/getDetails.do? On September 20, 2022 he asked a question on Twitter: “There is some social phenomenon which I suspect explains non work, non marriage, deaths of despair, general alienation and, I suspect, the rise of reactionary populism. It should be a major task of social science to understand it.”This question demonstrates the large gap in his knowledge about the Karl Marx theory of alienation, which Summers, as an economist should be aware of. [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/preface.htm key=SUMMERS, LAWRENCE Listing Detail: "Lawrence H. Summers,"] Public Harvard Directory, retrieved March 31, 2017
  4. ^ Summers, Lawrence H. and John A. Haigh "From the Directors," About section, Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, retrieved March 31, 2017
  5. ^ Dastin, Jeffrey; Soni, Aditya (November 22, 2023). "Sam Altman to return as OpenAI CEO after his tumultuous ouster". Reuters.
  6. ^ a b c d "Former Chief Economists" Archived November 4, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, Data & Research office, The World Bank, retrieved March 31, 2017
  7. ^ a b c d "Lawrence H. Summers", World Bank Live, The World Bank, retrieved March 31, 2017
  8. ^ "Lawrence Summers (1999 - 2001)," U.S. Treasury Department, Last Updated: November 20, 2010, retrieved March 31, 2017
  9. ^ "Full Transcript: President Summers' Remarks at the National Bureau of Economic Research, Jan. 14 2005". The Harvard Crimson. February 18, 2005. Retrieved January 25, 2022.
  10. ^ Plotz, David."Larry Summers: How the Great Brain learned to grin and bear it.", Slate, June 29, 2001.
  11. ^ Summers, Lawrence Henry (1982). An asset price approach to the analysis of capital income taxation (Ph.D.). Harvard University. OCLC 9526217 – via ProQuest.
  12. ^ {{cite web|title=Obama's LSE alumni|url=http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2009/ObamasLSEalumni.aspx%7Cpublisher=London School of Economics|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110916195224/https://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2009/ObamasLSEalumni.aspx |archive-date=2011-09-16 }
  13. ^ Poterba, James M. (Winter 1995). "In Honor of Lawrence H. Summers, Winner of the John Bates Clark Medal". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 9 (1): 165–182. doi:10.1257/jep.9.1.165. ISSN 0895-3309.
  14. ^ a b "The 30 Most Famous Harvard Students Of All Time". Business Insider. Retrieved August 7, 2017.
  15. ^ "Lawrence H. Summers". www.hks.harvard.edu.
  16. ^ "New ideas: The World Bank hires a famous contrarian," July 18, 2016, The Economist, retrieved March 31, 2017
  17. ^ a b c "Furor on Memo At World Bank," February 7, 1992, The New York Times, retrieved March 30, 2017
  18. ^ Office Memorandum from Lawrence M. Summers, Subject: GEP, the World Bank/IMFMIGA, December 12, 1991. This was an internal memo at the World Bank, not intended for the public -- reportedly sarcastic, rather than sincere, according to its authors -- that highlighted the economic logic of dumping waste in less-developed countries.
  19. ^ "Toxic Memo". Harvard Magazine. May–June 2001., also posted at: "Toxic memo". HarvardMagazine.com. Archived from the original on December 3, 2008. Retrieved November 8, 2017.
  20. ^ A New Economic Team: The Nominee; The Administration's Fiscal Closer. The New York Times. May 13, 1999.
  21. ^ Bruno S. Sergi (2009). Misinterpreting Modern Russia. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 79. ISBN 978-0-8264-2772-4.
  22. ^ Naomi Klein, "The Shock Doctrine", p. 231
  23. ^ Blustein, Paul (2001). "The Chastening". Public Affairs, New York. Archived from the original on December 8, 2010.
  24. ^ Blustein, Paul (2001). "The Chastening". Public Affairs, New York. p. 232. Archived from the original on December 8, 2010.
  25. ^ Wampler, Robert (December 18, 2009). "Kyoto Redux? Obama's Challenges at Copenhagen Echo Clinton's at Kyoto". National Security Archive at George Washington University. Retrieved April 10, 2010.
  26. ^ Aides Say Clinton Would Veto Tax Compromise. The Washington Post. July 26, 1999.
  27. ^ Krugman, Paul (November 20, 2008). "California Energy Memories". The New York Times. Retrieved April 4, 2010.
  28. ^ Gibney, Alex. "Larry Summers' Enron Problem". The Daily Beast.
  29. ^ a b Labaton, Stephen (November 5, 1999). "Congress Passes Wide Ranging Law Repealing Bank laws". The New York Times. Retrieved March 25, 2009.
  30. ^ Paletta, Damian (March 10, 2009). "Ten Questions for Those Fixing the Financial Mess". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved March 26, 2009.
  31. ^ "the warning". Frontline/PBS. October 23, 2009. Retrieved October 26, 2009.
  32. ^ "CFTC Issues Concept Release Concerning Over-The-Counter Derivatives Market". U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. May 7, 1998. Retrieved September 16, 2013.
  33. ^ Summers, Lawrence (July 30, 1998). "Lawrence H. Summers Testimony". Archived from the original on October 25, 2009.
  34. ^ Orrell, David (2010). Economyths : ten ways economics gets it wrong. Mississauga, Ontario: John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. pp. 142–143. ISBN 9780470677933. LCCN 2011286013.
  35. ^ Friedman, Jeff (2011). What Caused the Financial Crisis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 312. ISBN 978-0-8122-0493-3. OCLC 793012561.
  36. ^ Michael Hirsh (February 20, 2009). "The Reeducation of Larry Summers". Newsweek. Retrieved January 4, 2014.
  37. ^ Zumbrun, Joshua (April 19, 2010). "Clinton Calls Advice He Got on Derivatives 'Wrong'". Bloomberg. Retrieved April 27, 2023.
  38. ^ YUNews Director of the National Economic Council, Dr. Lawrence H. Summers, is Keynote Speaker at Yeshiva University's Annual Hanukkah Dinner and Convocation on December 13, November 18, 2009
  39. ^ The Harvard Crimson Did Summers’ Faith Affect His Fall?, March 3, 2006
  40. ^ The Harvard Crimson A Milestone of Faith, October 14, 2001
  41. ^ Harvard's First Jewish President. The Harvard Crimson. March 8, 2006
  42. ^ Bombardieri, Marcella (June 6, 2006). "Some seek a scholar's return". The Boston Globe.
  43. ^ Dillon, Sam (February 18, 2005). "Harvard Chief Defends His Talk on Women". The New York Times. Retrieved February 13, 2022.
  44. ^ a b c d e "Archive of: Remarks at NBER Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce". Archived from the original on January 30, 2008. Retrieved January 30, 2008.. January 14, 2005.
  45. ^ Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1995). "Sex differences in mental scores, variability, and numbers of high scoring individuals". Science, 269, 41–45.
  46. ^ Lehrke, R. (1997). Sex linkage of intelligence: The X-Factor. New York: Praeger.
  47. ^ Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. M. (2006). "Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years". Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 316–345.
  48. ^ Summers' Remarks on Women Draw Fire[dead link]. The Boston Globe. January 17, 2005
  49. ^ Saletan, William (January 21, 2005). "Don't Worry Your Pretty Little Head". Slate.
  50. ^ Summers's 'sexism' costs him top Treasury job. The Independent. November 24, 2008
  51. ^ Sheryl Sandberg (November 7, 2008). "Larry Summers' True Record on Women". HuffPost. Retrieved January 4, 2014.
  52. ^ "Larry Summers II on Conversations with Bill Kristol". ConversationsWithBillKristol.org. Retrieved November 8, 2017.
  53. ^ Psychoanalysis Q-and-A: Steven Pinker. The Harvard Crimson. January 19, 2005
  54. ^ Poll: Students Say Summers Should Stay. The Harvard Crimson. February 20, 2006
  55. ^ Finder, Alan (July 29, 2005). "A Harvard Governor, Dissatisfied, Resigns". The New York Times. Retrieved December 5, 2013.
  56. ^ Board Member's Letter of Resignation. The New York Times. August 2, 2005
  57. ^ a b Nicholas Ciarelli; Anton Troianovski (February 10, 2006). "'Tawdry Shleifer Affair' Stokes Faculty Anger Toward Summers". The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved May 30, 2013.
  58. ^ McClintick, David (January 13, 2006). "How Harvard Lost Russia". Institutional Investor. Archived from the original on July 5, 2014.
  59. ^ a b c Scharnick, Jaquelyn M. (May 1, 2003). "Mogul Donor Gives Harvard More Than Money". The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved July 12, 2019.
  60. ^ Ward, Vicky (March 2003). "The Talented Mr. Epstein". Vanity Fair. Retrieved July 12, 2019. Epstein has pledged at least $25 million to Harvard to create the Epstein Program for Mathematical Biology and Evolutionary Dynamics, and Epstein will have an office at the university...He says he was reluctant to have his name attached to the program, but Summers persuaded him.
  61. ^ "Program for Evolutionary Dynamics". ped.fas.harvard.edu. Retrieved July 12, 2019.
  62. ^ "Epstein Flight Logs Released in USA vs. Maxwell" (PDF). Retrieved December 27, 2021.
  63. ^ Briquelet, Kate (July 10, 2019). "REVEALED: We Found Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's Secret Charity". The Daily Beast. Retrieved July 12, 2019. In 2016, Gratitude America Ltd. shelled out $110,000 to Verse Video Education. The Cambridge, Massachusetts-based nonprofit produces the PBS show Poetry in America, whose creator and host is Harvard professor Elisa New. Verse's 2016 tax return named New as the group's president but doesn't include specific donors for its $1.38 million in total contributions. New is married to Summers, Harvard University's former president, who hobnobbed with Epstein in elite international relations groups and, like Bill Clinton, flew on Epstein's private jet.
  64. ^ Sharif, Shirin (August 5, 2004). "Harvard grads face off against thefacebook.com". The Stanford Daily. Archived from the original on June 18, 2010.
  65. ^ President and Fellows of Harvard College, IRS Form 990, 2006 & 2007.
  66. ^ Schuker, Daniel J. T. (July 7, 2006). "Summers Named Eliot Univ. Prof". The Harvard Crimson.
  67. ^ "Berggruen Institute". Archived from the original on June 13, 2018. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
  68. ^ "Why Nicolas Berggruen is Creating an Institute for Geniuses", Town and Country, May 11, 2016. "Another wing of the Berggruen Institute has technologists like Elon Musk and Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, as well as former treasury secretary Larry Summers."
  69. ^ Levy, Ari (June 30, 2011). "Summers Joins Andreessen Horowitz as a Part-Time Adviser to Entrepreneurs". Bloomberg.
  70. ^ a b c d Benson, Clea (August 2, 2013). "Summers After Government Saw Wealth Surge to $17 Million". Bloomberg L.P. Retrieved August 10, 2013.
  71. ^ Greenwald, Glenn (April 4, 2009). "Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Street's ownership of government". Salon. Retrieved August 10, 2013.
  72. ^ "Former Steering Committee Members". bilderbergmeetings.org. Bilderberg Group. Archived from the original on February 2, 2014. Retrieved February 8, 2014.
  73. ^ Staff, W. S. J. (August 8, 2013). "Indian Drivers Attract Larry Summers". WSJ.com. Retrieved November 8, 2017.
  74. ^ Montgomery, Lori (September 22, 2010). "Lawrence Summers to leave economic council, return to Harvard". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved August 7, 2017.
  75. ^ Schmidt, Robert; Julianna Goldman (February 5, 2009). "Volcker Chafes at Obama Panel Delay, Strains With Summers Rise". Bloomberg.
  76. ^ Calmes, Jackie (June 8, 2009). "Obama's Economic Circle Keeps Tensions High". The New York Times. Retrieved April 4, 2010.
  77. ^ Leonhardt, David (November 25, 2008). "The Return of Larry Summers". The New York Times.
  78. ^ DeFazio, Peter; Video Interview (January 2008). "DeFazio Slams Summers".
  79. ^ Krugman, Paul (January 6, 2009). "Stimulus Arithmetic (wonkish but important)". The New York Times.
  80. ^ "Sean Grady: Shootout at Jackson Hole: The World's Central Bankers Take Aim at Deflation." The Independent. August 14, 2010.
  81. ^ Lizza, Ryan (January 30, 2012). "The Obama memos". The New Yorker.
  82. ^ Scheiber, Noam (February 22, 2012). "The Memo that Larry Summers Didn't Want Obama to See". The New Republic.
  83. ^ Soloman, Deborah; Mark Maremont (February 14–15, 2009). "Bankers Face Strict Pay Cap". The Wall Street Journal. pp. 1, above the fold.
  84. ^ Zeleny, Jeff (April 3, 2009). "Financial Industry Paid Millions to Obama Aide". The New York Times. Retrieved April 4, 2009.
  85. ^ TechCrunch (2011). Square Adds Former U.S. Secretary Of The Treasury Larry Summers To Board. Retrieved June 24, 2011.
  86. ^ Dealbook (2011). Larry Summers Joins Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved June 30, 2011.
  87. ^ TechCrunch (2012). With An IPO On Its Radar, Lending Club Adds Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers To Its Heavyweight Board. Retrieved December 12, 2012.
  88. ^ Data, Premise (July 16, 2015). "Welcoming Larry Summers to Premise's Board of Directors". Medium. Retrieved February 22, 2018.
  89. ^ Summers, Lawrence H. (April 4, 2016). "Larry Summers: Data collection is the ultimate public good". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved February 22, 2018.
  90. ^ "Staying in EU 'best hope' for UK's future say ex-US Treasury secretaries". BBC News. April 20, 2016.
  91. ^ "Lawrence Summers on Brexit: A wakeup call for elites". June 24, 2016. Retrieved July 15, 2016.
  92. ^ "The economic consequences of a Trump win would be severe | Larry Summers". June 6, 2016.
  93. ^ Moreno, J. Edward (May 6, 2020). "Progressive groups renew push to oust Larry Summers from Biden campaign citing environmental concerns". The Hill. Retrieved September 16, 2020.
  94. ^ Golshan, Tara (April 24, 2020). "Joe Biden Under Pressure From Progressives To Cut Out Larry Summers". HuffPost. Retrieved September 16, 2020.
  95. ^ Matthews, Steve (August 6, 2020). "Larry Summers Rules Out Taking a Job in a Biden Administration". Bloomberg. Retrieved September 16, 2020.
  96. ^ Kurtz, Annalyn; Yousuf, Hibah (September 15, 2013). "Larry Summers withdraws name for Fed chair job". CNNMoney. Retrieved September 15, 2013. After months of contentious public debate, Larry Summers has withdrawn his name from consideration to become the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. President Obama said he spoke with Summers earlier Sunday and accepted his decision.
  97. ^ Lowrey, Annie; Appelbaum, Binyamin (September 15, 2013). "Summers Pulls Name From Consideration for Fed Chief". The New York Times. Retrieved September 16, 2013. Facing growing opposition in Congress, Lawrence H. Summers, the former Treasury secretary and a top contender for Federal Reserve chairman, told President Obama that he didn't want to be considered for the job.
  98. ^ Simpson, Connor (October 19, 2013). "Larry Summers Snubbed Netanyahu's Offer to Run Israel's Banks". The Atlantic. Retrieved October 20, 2013.
  99. ^ "Larry Summers rejects offer to become BoI governor". Globes. October 20, 2013. Retrieved October 21, 2013.
  100. ^ Williams, Jordan (March 20, 2021). "Larry Summers blasts $1.9 T stimulus as 'least responsible' economic policy in 40 years". The Hill. Retrieved April 25, 2021.
  101. ^ "Letter from Harvard group holding Israel 'responsible' for war with Hamas sparks backlash". Independent. Retrieved October 17, 2023.
  102. ^ "Harvard student groups issued an anti-Israel statement. CEOs want them blacklisted". CNN. Retrieved October 17, 2023.
  103. ^ "Growing backlash over Harvard students' pro-Palestine letter". BBC News. October 10, 2023. Retrieved December 7, 2023.
  104. ^ Teo, Kai Xiang. "Former Harvard president Larry Summers thinks Bill Ackman asking for lists of student names is the 'stuff of Joe McCarthy'". Business Insider. Retrieved October 17, 2023.
  105. ^ Ebbert, Stephanie. "Larry Summers was ousted as Harvard president. He has a lot to say about what's wrong with the university now. - The Boston Globe". BostonGlobe.com. Retrieved March 22, 2024.
  106. ^ "Victoria J. Perry, A Lawyer, Is Wed To an Economist". New York Times. September 30, 1984. Retrieved September 16, 2013. Victoria Joanne Perry, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Charles H. Perry of Ormond Beach, Fla., and Cape Rosier, Me., was married yesterday to Lawrence Henry Summers, a son of Mr. and Mrs. Robert Summers of Merion Station, Pa. The ceremony was performed at the Harvard Club in Boston ...
  107. ^ "Victoria Perry to Wed L. H. Summers". The New York Times. June 10, 1984. Retrieved January 4, 2014.
  108. ^ Rosenberg, John S. (September–October 2006). "Summers in Summary: A presidency, and the University, in perspective". Harvard Magazine.
  109. ^ Ferguson, Charles (October 3, 2010). "Larry Summers and the Subversion of Economics". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved January 4, 2014.

External links

Diplomatic posts
Preceded by Chief Economist of the World Bank
1991–1993
Succeeded by
Political offices
Preceded by Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs
1993–1995
Succeeded by
Preceded by United States Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
1995–1999
Succeeded by
Preceded by United States Secretary of the Treasury
1999–2001
Succeeded by
Preceded by Director of the National Economic Council
2009–2011
Succeeded by
Academic offices
Preceded by President of Harvard University
2001–2006
Succeeded by
U.S. order of precedence (ceremonial)
Preceded byas Former US Cabinet Member Order of precedence of the United States
as Former US Cabinet Member
Succeeded byas Former US Cabinet Member
This page was last edited on 7 May 2024, at 19:41
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.