In response to an FT piece on 25th February 2016, entitled 'In defence of killing the $100 bill' by Peter Sands and Larry Summers in the Larry Summers Blog
“Beware politicians trying to limit the way you can conduct private economic business. It never turns out well" (said the WSJ)..."There are two levels of illogic here" (said LS and PS)
I've got a slightly different take - beware politicians who respond to criticism of their integrity with claims of illogic. For that is what this is Professor Summers - a suggestion that you are a politician who pursues hidden agendas, who disguises one agenda by justifying it with another one more palatable to his audience. Translated into the colloquial - a 'snake oil salesman'. As put by the North American Native Peoples when they saw through the deceit of the first 'politicians' they encountered - 'White man, him speak with forked tongue'
I am about to repeat that assertion and spell it out a bit louder for you Professor Summers - I don't trust your words or your agenda as far as I could throw them. You have a history of advocating policies that were justified as beneficial to the nation and the 'little people', which turned out to be no such thing. Some warned of the likely consequences and the deceit up front - they were dismissed with claims of illogicality and even 'conspiracy theory'' as I recall. How foolish we plebs are to imagine that a politician would ever conceal a selfish motive.
Nevertheless those policies, concocted under the administration of President Clinton (another shining examples of truth telling) were however, extremely beneficial to the banks, and to the numerous politicians who benefited from the generous appreciation of those banks I.E. in continued 'donations' to their campaigns. Furthermore, when the consequences of those policies led to disaster, the beneficiaries were bailed out by the nation and the 'little people', thus adding insult to injury. Your reputation, at least amongst your admirers, appears to be coated with Teflon. Newsflash - it's wearing a bit thin.
So given that you are now claiming that one of the best things to come out of the G20 will be a commitment to remove high denomination notes, to stamp down on drugs and terrorism, that this is an opportunity to 'stand up for ordinary people' - you might want to know what one of the ordinary people thinks of this:
If you are serious about terrorism, ask your pals in the administration to stop arming and training terrorists. Ask them to stop dropping millions of pounds worth of equipment in the middle of deserts in the hope that 'moderates' turn up to retrieve them. You could even get out a dictionary and read them the definition of 'moderate' so that they are clear that it doesn't mean 'a set of murderous people who are temporarily on our side'.
Keep your hands off the money Professor Summers. You are a mouthpiece for governments who are running deficits expanding at twice the rate of GDP, who have been responsible for the policies that have led to that, who justify their incompetence with idiotic notions like the Phillips curve, and now a monstrosity that the market would never produce without governmental manipulations - negative interest rates.
Go off to the G20 if that's where you are going, and do your bit for the insolvent, intellectually bankrupt and clueless fools who are gathering there, and help them produce another set of communiqués designed to mask the panic that they will be feeling if they have even an ounce of awareness of the total pigs ear they have made of things. Do that. But don't come here expecting me to buy your snake oil.
I'll spell it out for you - I don't believe you.