Larry Summers

When Goldman Sachs writes extended treatises on the impact of snowfall and makes regression analyses of NESIS snowfall scores with payroll impacts, you know Goldman economists i) take their cure from Larry Summers' public caveats, ii) have an extended sense of humor, and iii) have way too much free time on their hands. We share the following GS essay on the second derivative impact of snowfall on the economy, but here is the punchline: "Our models suggest a small decline in payrolls without incorporating the special impact of the snowstorms, or the boost from temporary Census hiring.  Adding approximately 30,000 Census hires suggests unchanged or slightly positive payrolls; subtracting the snowstorm effects suggests a payroll number in the -50,000 to -100,000 range. Our forecast of a decline of 100,000 payroll jobs assumes an impact at the higher end of this range.  Despite this, we are inclined to think the risk remains on the side of a still bigger impact from the snowstorm itself, for two reasons:  1) the larger effects observed in as-first-reported data suggest that lags in reporting itself could be part of a snowstorm’s effect, 2) both the high-impact January 1996 snowstorm and the February 2010 storm hit slightly earlier in the month than others, and this difference in timing might be important in terms of the impact on new hires added to payrolls in the survey week." Since Larry Summers, who one may venture has a pretty good advance look at the NFP #, has warned snowfall will not be "additive" to the NFP per se, any substantial downside surprise will merely be attributed to the vagaries of mother nature, which has put global warming on hold for the time being.

President Obama's Proposal on health care "reform" is a far reaching plan that will cause financial havoc to the health care system specifically and to the economy in general. It, along with the plans passed by the Senate and the House, are so invasive that we will be forever mired in bureaucratic control of this most important segment of our lives. Think of the movie "Brazil."

"Koo’s theory and his prescriptions for what currently ails the world are as fascinating as they are unconventional. Considering the woeful track record of orthodox economists (across the entire spectrum from liberal to conservative) in
diagnosing, much less treating, the body economic as it has been wracked with credit ills, Koo’s fresh perspectives, grounded in the searing experience of Japan’s Great Recession, demand careful consideration." Kathryn Welling

The final part (III) of Econophile's analysis of the economy in 2010. Today, "The Consequences" -- deleveraging, inflation/deflation, recovery, and what to expect in 2010.

The non-bailout bailout is here. Or is it? They really should have used Larry Summers. Van Rompuy says "determined and coordinated action if needed" will be provided. Uh, it is needed. But what is the deal? And what are the details? Greek 2s10s 40 bps steeper to +93 bps as 2 Year trades 56 bps lower to 4.97%.

The only thing in this world worse than Hank Paulson showing up in Congress with his initial 3-page TARP proposal giving him unlimited control over the US printing press? 12 non-Hank Paulsons, all of whom speak different languages, all of whom are hell bent on bailing everyone and everything out (just not on their political or physical dime...or 10 eurocents as the case may be), and all of whom have no idea how to bail out others' (and soon their own) economy... oh, and none of whom have access to Hank's reserve currency printer. In short, more than 24 hours after announcing a "bailout" of Greece, nobody in Europe has any idea what they need to do to actually "bail" Greece out. On the verge of tomorrow's summit during which it is widely expected that EU's new president
Herman Van Rompuy will announce just what the details of [asset guarantee|debt purchase|IMF (aka US Taxpayer) to the rescue] plan will be, the utter cluelessness and confusion is unprecedented.

Yesterday we presented our views on why Europe's decision to tip over the first of the bailout dominoes will be inherently a catastrophic one in the long term, and will ultimately transfer the peripheral liquidity risk into funding, and ultimately, solvency (and once again, liquidity) risk to the very core. Today, Niall Ferguson joins in, in this latest Op-Ed in the Financial Times. "It began in Athens. It is spreading to Lisbon and Madrid. But it would be a grave mistake to assume that the sovereign debt crisis that is unfolding will remain confined to the weaker eurozone economies. For this is more than just a Mediterranean problem with a farmyard acronym. It is a fiscal crisis of the western world. Its ramifications are far more profound than most investors currently appreciate." In other words, Marc Faber 1, CNBC talking heads, 0... as usual.

Now that some sort of Greek bailout is imminent, most likely in asset guarantee form, it is high time to evaluate the full impact of Europe's decision to jettison monetary prudence at the expense of patching a crumbling fiscal dam holding back trillions in bad investment decision cockroaches, accumulated over the years. Relying on a presentation by ML's Jeffrey Rosenberg, we observe that by providing loan guarantees to the periphery, the core (Germany/France/Benelux) may have well destabilized the core problem for the Eurozone, namely a whopping €1.6 trillion (that's in euro) in total 2010 financing needs, a number which consists of €400 billion in 2010 bond maturities, €700 billion in rolling short term debt and €530 billion in combined 2010 fiscal deficits. Germany has just taken an acute liquidity crisis in the periphery, and courtesy of action we already saw earlier in Bund rates, has sown the seeds for a funding crisis of none other than the very heart of the Eurozone.

This latest on Greece, this time from Dow Jones. Why is Obama speaking about windmills as the future of global moral hazard, Larry Summers edition, is being decided in Berlin? From DJ: "Finance Ministry spokesman Michael Offer said EU members wanted to develop further recapitalization measures that calm the markets."

Whether or not large nations actually go bankrupt, one thing is clear . . . Larry Summers, Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner and their foreign counterparts have failed ...

To: Lloyd Blankfein

Re: Winning the Public Relations War

Six months ago, with what I mistakenly took to be your tacit approval, I attempted to address ordinary Americans, almost as equals.

They envied and resented our firm; I sought merely to correct their misunderstandings about Goldman Sachs and send them on their way, so that they might more briskly resume their quest for gainful employment.

In hindsight, I misjudged their ability to see the reality of their situation, and of ours. At the time I accepted your strong suggestion that I never again try to speak directly to mortals -- or, as you referred to them, “The Morts.”

In his first State of the Union speech in 2010, President Barack Obama carefully chose his words in calling for a new jobs bill to stimulate real organic economic growth. However, politicians have always been extremely deft about making speeches that present a united front with the people against corruption, while often hammering out legislation behind closed doors that ensures no real change will ever occur. To determine if the wool is being pulled over our eyes once again, let’s turn to the actual text of President Obama’s State of the Union speech.

The one most promising legacy out of the greatest corporate con early in the last decade, which by the way was Enron for those of you who may not have been born yet, will undoutedly be its lobbying power. As Politico notes: "Possible successors to Bernanke include three people currently advising Obama on the economy, former Fed chief Paul Volcker, Larry Summers and Christina Romer. Kohn was traveling in Europe at the end of the week on Fed business, but strategy on the Bernanke confirmation was being led by former Enron lobbyist Linda Robertson, who is viewed as an effective advocate for the banking chief on Capitol Hill." One con lobbying for another con: what a swell summation of the sad state of affairs in this once great country.

While many pundits will obsess over the markets' gyration in this past week, and make it into a major headline in the quest for eyeballs, the truth is that the S&P turning negative for the year was merely a sideshow (the next real market crash will be much more memorable). No - the real story was the advent of Paul Volcker to his rightful place on the, well, right of President Obama, coupled with the now imminent departure of Geithner and Summers, and the massive question mark that now hangs over Goldman Sachs. Who could have believed that the implications of one Senatorial election could be so profound, yet that is precisely the stuff black swans are made of. The new regime is here, and like it or not, it brings with it a new framework of variables. Yet shifting from the past and looking at the future, the question now becomes what should investors focus on? Just who is this Paul Volcker who will now be the President's seemingly primary economic advisor, and more importantly, what will his policies be like? Luckily, an extensive blueprint already exists, and Zero Hedge readers should be quite familiar with it by now.

Larry is asked on his view of the ever escalating war with Wall Street
and its implications: "If you do the right things for the fundamentals
and for soundness, over time markets tend to work out. And if you let
your policies be guided by day to day market movements, that's what
tends to be the problem. If you ask yourself 'how did we get here?' one
central part of how we got there, one central part was all those people
who believed all those prices, believed all those credit spreads, who
let day to day market levels be their guide through 2006 through the early part of 2007." Wow, Larry - maybe Obama's speechwriter should tone down the constant reference to the "Dow Jones" in that case to highlight just what a great job the increasingly clueless president is doing.

As the administration's every TV appearance is predicated first and foremost by indicating just how high the market has "risen" in the past x minutes, hours, days, and months, Larry's statement that it is perfectly ok to use the market response when things are going ok, but to ignore it when its says the administration has fucked up beyond compare, is the supreme epitome of hypocrisy.