Seeking Alpha

Larry Summers is a paid adviser to Citigroup (C), Nasdaq (NDAQ) and other financial firms,...

Larry Summers is a paid adviser to Citigroup (C), Nasdaq (NDAQ) and other financial firms, positions that could count against him in the race to be the next Chair of the Fed. On the other hand, Summers is also close to Barack Obama, having helped prep the latter when he was a presidential candidate during the financial crisis of 2008 and having served in his administration. It's a relationship that Janet Yellen doesn't have.
Comments (5)
  • 7footMoose
    , contributor
    Comments (2266) | Send Message
    Everyone in Washington political circles is "owned" by some interest group or groups. Do not be so naive as to think otherwise. What drives a presidential candidate to spend $500,000,000 or more of other people donated dollars for an office that pays $400,000 per year? I assure you that it is not just the job it is the influence the job provides.
    28 Jul 2013, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • Ray Lopez
    , contributor
    Comments (1526) | Send Message
    Yeah, here in the Philippines the city government officials running for office pay $15 per vote--why? Not generosity, but they have calculated, with mathematical certainty, how much graft they will receive once in office and they will recoup their vote buying, with interest, when they get elected. Same in DC but without the blatant vote buying.
    28 Jul 2013, 10:43 AM Reply Like
  • Philip Marlowe
    , contributor
    Comments (1045) | Send Message
    That does not mean that we should turn a blind eye to corruption.
    28 Jul 2013, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • Ray Lopez
    , contributor
    Comments (1526) | Send Message
    Larry Summers, what a hypocritical, misogynist tool. The only thing worse however might be the dovish Janet Yellen. This whole succession issue illustrates why it's folly to have a single person or committee control the US money supply. Far better to crowdsource it, the way it was before the 1913 creation of the Federal Reserve. Don't matter if you use gold or a basket of commodities or some other measure, but fix the money supply. Letting it float is akin to floating exchange rates, and as Nobel Prize winner Robert Mundell will tell you, that's folly. As for growth rates in the 19th century under the gold standard--they were as great or greater than today (source: econ historian Angus Maddison) and innovation was in many ways higher. Fix our patent system, fix our money supply, get redistribution-ist government out of our lives, and we're back to high productivity within 10 years. More likely we'll have an economic collapse and have to start from ground zero I'm afraid.
    28 Jul 2013, 10:40 AM Reply Like
  • hasapiko
    , contributor
    Comments (31) | Send Message
    This comment contains the kind of nonsense that the ignoramuses on the right like to spout. Growth rates in the 19th century may have been high, but the financial system also collapsed every 10 years or so. The people of this country finally got tired of that and rightfully so. That's why the Fed was created and it worked fine, with the exception of 1929, when it refused to bail out the banks, as it should have done. Then it worked fine until the reign of Alan Greenspan, who refused to rein in the rampant speculation that followed bank deregulation. Larry Summers is a horrible choice because he was part of the cabal that deregulated the banking system that led to the Great Recession. Janet Yellin is a much preferred candidate. I would trust her any day of the week over Summers.
    28 Jul 2013, 08:19 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector