Latest news with #LarrySummers
CNN
30-05-2025
- General
- CNN
‘Resist and Reform': Former Harvard President on Trump's Attacks - CNN Political Briefing - Podcast on CNN Audio
'Resist and Reform': Former Harvard President on Trump's Attacks CNN Political Briefing 25 mins The ongoing feud between President Trump and Harvard University is heating up as the White House attempts to ban the university from enrolling international students. Harvard President Emeritus Larry Summers shares his insights on the clash and explains why the White House's actions could hinder efforts to reform Harvard's flaws.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Republicans' big bill scared bond markets. That's bad news for your wallet.
The market for U.S. debt, aka the bond market, is a huge and critical part of global finance, but one that usually percolates in the background. Yet lately it's been in the headlines. What's behind this disturbance in the force? You don't need to be an expert in finance to answer that question, and it's important that you understand the answer, because it will have a direct impact on your economic life. Perhaps not surprisingly, politics are at the root of these recent developments: the recklessness of both the Trump administration's economic agenda and congressional Republicans' deficit-exploding legislation are playing out in real time in ways you need to know about. Starting at the beginning: As we all know, the U.S. government consistently spends more than it collects in taxes. This difference between government receipts and outlays is the deficit, which in 2024 was $1.8 trillion, or 6.4% of America's gross domestic product. Where does the Treasury get this money? It borrows it in the bond market, meaning it sells IOUs to creditors who lend money to U.S. government. They don't do this because they're patriots who want to make sure the government can meet its obligations. They do it for a) the yield on the loan, i.e., the interest rate that the bond pays out, and b) the safety of investing in U.S. Treasurys. Such investments have historically been the least risky investments you could make. The U.S. government has always been safely counted on to pay its debts. Default risk has been zero. OK, so why the anxious headlines, like 'The Bond Market Is Waking Up to the Fiscal Mess in Washington' in The Wall Street Journal and 'Bond Market Shudders as Tax Bill Deepens Deficit Worries' in The New York Times? Why are economists, myself included, who formerly told debt scolds to stop obsessing over the debt now urging the opposite? 'In a short amount of time,' economist Larry Summers recently told The Atlantic, 'the fiscal picture has gone from comfortably in the green-light region to the red-light region.' As the headlines suggest, a key trigger for this angst is the legislation that passed the House this week. Global investors in U.S. debt are learning how many trillions the GOP's bill is likely to pile on to the already swollen deficit (since it's a work in progress, we don't know the number yet, but my analysis suggests something in the $5 trillion range). The Wall Street Journal's chief economics commentator Greg Ip noted that the deficit implications of this budget 'would be higher than any other sustained stretch in U.S. history, and more than almost any other advanced economy. … Before 2023, [U.S. deficits] accounted for half of advanced economies' deficits, according to the International Monetary Fund. From 2023 through 2030, it will be two-thirds.' The result is an increase in the interest rate that the U.S. government has to pay its lenders. Think of it this way. You've got $1,000 to lend to one of your friends, both of whom are asking for the loan. Your pal Norm has a good job, a stable family, and wants to invest in a course that will set him up to get that regional VP gig he's been angling for. Your other pal, Shady, just got fired from another job, but promises that he's going to take your $1,000 to Vegas and pay you back double. Assuming you're a rational lender, you're going to charge Norm a much lower interest rate than Shady. Bond investors are making a similar call. They're starting to worry about the sustainability of our debt, which, at $29 trillion, is closing in on 100% of U.S. GDP. That's a big number, to be sure, but it's not automatically worrisome. After all, even with the onslaught of Trumpian chaos, we still have one of the world's strongest, most productive economies, the dollar is still the world's dominant currency, and default risk on our sovereign debt remains just about zero. Understanding why bond investors are right to be worried, then, requires one step deeper into the weeds. Whether we're talking about your family or the government, there are two key factors that determine debt sustainability: the interest rate and the growth rate. If Norm borrows at 3% and gets that VP promotion, which boosts his earnings by 4%, he's golden. He can service his debt with the income from his investment. Whereas if Shady borrows at 3% and loses everything in Vegas, he's up a creek without a paddle — and so, as his lender, are you. Mapping that onto the U.S. case, investors are worried that the Trump administration and the Republican Congress are engaged in set of actions that will both lower growth and raise interest rates, a toxic combination. The GOP bill doesn't just add unprecedented trillions to the debt; it takes health coverage and nutritional support from poor people to very partially offset big tax cuts for the wealthy. There's nothing in there that would lead an objective person to think there's anything pro-growth about it. Add the tariffs are expected to slow growth this year, perhaps from around 2% to around 1%, according to forecasts by Goldman Sachs. This combination of ever-increasing debt (which, to be fair, predated Trump; he's just making it a lot worse), slower growth and the pervasive sense that neither the administration nor the congressional majority even know or care about these risks, is leading lenders to the U.S. government to insist on a higher return for buying those IOUs known as Treasury bonds. The rate on a 30-year Treasury has climbed from about 4% last September to about 5% on Friday. That's just 1 percentage point, but when you're servicing about $30 trillion in debt, one more point on the interest rate translates into $300 billion more in debt service. Even in Washington, that's real money. To make matters worse for all of us, the interest rates on U.S. Treasurys are benchmarks for other key rates throughout the economy, including those on credit cards, auto and mortgage loans. Mortgage rates climbed above 7% last week, and their momentum is solidly in the wrong direction. To be clear, it's very hard to predict where interest rates are going, but as long as Trump's policy continue to put downward pressure on growth and upward pressure on rates, I'm hard-pressed to see rates going anywhere but up. Actions have consequences, and financial markets don't subscribe to the administration's alternate reality where everything's fine and under control. In fact, the bond market is loudly saying everything is far from fine — and the folks under control are out of control. This article was originally published on
AsiaOne
25-05-2025
- Politics
- AsiaOne
Long advantageous, Harvard's China ties become a political liability, World News
WASHINGTON - Harvard University's links to China, long an asset to the school, have become a liability as the Trump administration levels accusations that its campus is plagued by Beijing-backed influence operations. On Thursday (May 22) the administration moved to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students, saying it fostered antisemitism and coordinated with the Chinese Communist Party. Among them are Chinese nationals who made up about a fifth of Harvard's foreign student intake in 2024, the university said. A US judge on Friday temporarily blocked the administration's order after the Cambridge, Massachusetts, university sued. The concerns about Chinese government influence at Harvard are not new. Some US lawmakers, many of them Republicans, have expressed worries that China is manipulating Harvard to gain access to US advanced technology, to circumvent US security laws and to stifle criticism of it in the United States. "For too long, Harvard has let the Chinese Communist Party exploit it," a White House official told Reuters on Friday, adding the school had "turned a blind eye to vigilante CCP-directed harassment on-campus." Harvard did not respond immediately to requests for comment. The school has said the revocation was a punishment for Harvard's "perceived viewpoint," which it called a violation of the right to free speech as guaranteed by the US Constitution's First Amendment. Harvard's links to China, which include research partnerships and China-focused academic centres, are longstanding. The ties have yielded major financial gifts, influence in international affairs and global prestige for the school. Former Harvard President Larry Summers, who has at times been critical of the university, called the Trump administration's move to block foreign students the most serious attack on the university to date. "It's hard to imagine a greater strategic gift to China than for the United States to sacrifice its role as a beacon to the world," he said in an interview with Politico. Health training In a statement, the Chinese embassy in Washington said: "Educational exchanges and co-operation between China and the United States are mutually beneficial and should not be stigmatised." The presence of Chinese students at Harvard and the school's links to the country are not evidence of wrongdoing. But the complexity and overlapping nature of the connections have been opaque enough to attract attention and criticism. The China-related issues cited by the Trump administration echo the work of the Republican-led House of Representatives' Select Committee on China. For example, Harvard provided public health-related training to Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC) officials after 2020. That year the US imposed sanctions on the Chinese paramilitary organisation for its role in alleged human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other Muslim ethnic groups in Xinjiang. The Department of Homeland Security said those engagements with XPCC continued "as recently as 2024." China vehemently denies any accusations of wrongdoing in Xinjiang, but both the Trump and Biden administrations have defined Beijing's policies in the region as "genocide." In another episode that has drawn questions, US business intelligence firm Strategy Risks said that Ronnie Chan, who facilitated a US$350 million (S$450 million) donation to Harvard in 2014 that led to its school of public health being named for his father, property developer T.H. Chan, is a member of the China-United States Exchange Foundation. The Hong Kong-based organisation, which says its aim is to foster dialogue between the two countries, has been classified as a foreign principal under US law, requiring US lobbyists working for it to disclose that work to the US government. Former professor convicted Former Harvard Professor Charles Lieber was scrutinised by a Trump programme started in 2018 called the China Initiative, which was focused on fighting Chinese espionage and intellectual property theft and investigated researchers and universities over whether they disclosed financial ties to Beijing. He was convicted in 2021 of lying about his ties to China in connection with federally funded research. In April, he became a full-time professor at a Chinese university. The initiative was halted under the Biden administration after critics said it led to racial profiling and a culture of fear that chilled scientific collaboration. US lawmakers from both parties have expressed worries about the efforts by Beijing-linked student associations to monitor political activities. In April 2024, a Harvard student activist was physically ejected from an event by a Chinese exchange student - not faculty or security staff - for interrupting a speech by China's Ambassador Xie Feng. Pressure has mounted on Harvard in Trump's second term, with the Education Department in April asking the university to provide records on its foreign funding after it said a review of required reporting on large foreign-source gifts and contracts revealed incomplete and inaccurate disclosures. The Trump administration's moves against Harvard have nonetheless alarmed some China experts. Yaqiu Wang, a US-based human rights researcher who came to the US from China as a student, said the Trump administration's move to ban foreign students at Harvard was "completely counterproductive." "The concerns over the Chinese government's transnational repression attempts to silence critics are very legitimate, and also espionage concerns are legitimate." Wang said. "But to try to address that by banning, not only Chinese students, but foreign students, is just beyond comprehension." [[nid:718349]]
Indian Express
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Trump administration targets Harvard's China links: What you need to know
Harvard University's long-standing ties to China — once seen as a prestigious asset — are now drawing intense scrutiny from the Donald Trump administration, which has accused the university of fostering Chinese government influence and antisemitism on campus. On Thursday, the administration moved to revoke Harvard's ability to enrol foreign students, citing alleged coordination with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Among those affected would be Chinese nationals, who comprised about 20 per cent of Harvard's international student intake in 2024, according to the university. A federal judge temporarily blocked the order on Friday after Harvard filed a lawsuit challenging the decision. Allegations of Chinese government interference at Harvard are not new. As per a report by news agency Reuters, several US lawmakers, predominantly Republicans, have long raised concerns that China may be exploiting elite academic institutions like Harvard to access cutting-edge US technology, circumvent national security laws, and suppress criticism of Beijing within the United States. 'For too long, Harvard has let the Chinese Communist Party exploit it,' a White House official told Reuters, accusing the university of turning a blind eye to CCP-directed harassment on campus. Harvard has yet to respond publicly to the latest accusations. The university maintains that the administration's actions are politically motivated and constitute a violation of its First Amendment right to free speech. Harvard's ties to China span decades and include research partnerships, China-focused academic centres, and significant financial contributions. These relationships have helped enhance Harvard's global profile but are now being viewed through the lens of national security. Former Harvard President Larry Summers, often a critic of the university's internal policies, described the administration's move as the most serious attack on the institution to date. 'It's hard to imagine a greater strategic gift to China than for the United States to sacrifice its role as a beacon to the world,' Summers told Politico. In a statement, the Chinese Embassy in Washington defended US-China educational exchanges as mutually beneficial and warned against stigmatising academic collaboration. The administration's concerns echo a number of recent incidents and broader investigations: 📌Harvard reportedly continued to provide public health training to officials from the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC) after the US imposed sanctions on the group in 2020 for alleged human rights abuses against Uyghurs in Xinjiang. The Department of Homeland Security said those engagements continued into 2024. 📌Ronnie Chan, a Hong Kong property developer whose family donated $350 million to Harvard's School of Public Health in 2014, is a member of the China-United States Exchange Foundation, which has been designated as a foreign principal under US law due to its lobbying efforts. 📌Former Harvard chemistry professor Charles Lieber was convicted in 2021 for lying about his financial ties to China while conducting federally funded research. Once the subject of Trump's China Initiative, Lieber has since become a full-time professor at a Chinese university. The initiative was later shelved by the Biden administration over concerns of racial profiling and a chilling effect on scientific collaboration. Tensions over China's influence on US campuses have also played out in public incidents. In April 2024, a Harvard student activist was physically removed by a Chinese exchange student during an event disrupted by protest, raising questions about the role of Beijing-linked student groups in suppressing dissent. The Department of Education has since launched an inquiry into Harvard's foreign funding disclosures, following a review that found 'incomplete and inaccurate' records of major overseas contributions.
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Latest Trump attack on Harvard is ‘most serious' yet, former school president and Harvard critic says
The Trump administration's attempt to prevent Harvard University from enrolling international students spells the president's "most serious attack on the university to date," a former leader of Harvard and frequent critic of the school said. "It would be devastating if it was allowed to go into effect, not just for the university but for the image of the United States in the world, where our universities in general, and Harvard in particular, have been a beacon," Former Harvard President Larry Summers said in an interview Friday with Politico. More than a quarter of Harvard's student body is international. A federal judge on Friday blocked the administration from revoking a key certification that allows Harvard to enroll those students, one of a litany of actions the government has taken to exert control over the prestigious school. Read more: Here's everything Trump has stripped from Harvard so far — and what is threatened Summers argued that the loss of international students would diminish entrepreneurship on one of the nation's leading campuses, the school that produced numerous scientific leaders who were born abroad. 'It would make us less secure. After all, World War II was won by scientific innovation done by immigrants to American universities,' Summers said. 'It's hard to imagine a greater strategic gift to China than for the United States to sacrifice its role as a beacon to the world,' he added. The Trump administration had given Harvard an April deadline to submit detailed records about foreign students or lose the certification to enroll them. Harvard President Alan Garber said in a Friday letter to the school community that it had responded to the request as required by law. U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department sought the records, said the school's response was unsatisfactory. The federal government has pinpointed campus antisemitism as the reason for the escalating attacks on Harvard, though legal scholars and higher education community members have disagreed, claiming it is instead going after Harvard as a symbol of higher education. Summers, an economist and former Treasury Secretary who led Harvard from 2001 to 2006, has been a frequent critic of the university. Yet he said the Trump administration has pursued a 'punitive vendetta' against the university and clearly violated Harvard's right to due process and protections under the First Amendment. 'I'm certainly someone who has been critical of Harvard on antisemitism, on excessive identity politics, on lack of political diversity, on the need to more vigorously support American national security,' he told Politico. 'But the merits of this case are overwhelming, and Harvard needs to point them out as vigorously as it can, both in the court of law and in the court of public opinion.' Here's everything Trump has stripped from Harvard so far — and what is threatened Harvard foreign students feel like 'poker chips,' consider transfer after Trump attacks Federal judge blocks Trump admin from revoking Harvard enrollment of foreign students 'Unlawful and unwarranted': Harvard opens 2nd lawsuit against the Trump admin 'Deeply scary': Legal experts reel over Trump's 'brazen act' against Harvard Read the original article on MassLive.
