« And the new champion of the economic world :Niall Ferguson. Niall Ferguson ? | flavius's Blog | Thank you Kevin. One more time. »

Niall Ferguson


begins his letter in today's FT" Sir, I am glad to have furnished grist to Martin Wolf's mill"

Then subsequently tell us  " the normally hard-headed Mr Wolf must be dreaming"  and that "Mr Wolf blithely writes::" etc. and as  a parting shot , summarizes " the Fed is less insouciant than your columnist."

That's Wolf. The well known insouciant.

You might ask what this is all about. In broad terms it's about the self destruction through over exposure of a possibly competent historian who presents his deeply conservative  biases as self evident ecomomic truths, Or, more colloquolly, it's about the fact he's cluelss.

This episode kicked off three weeks ago in a New York Review of Books symposium in which NF magisterially presented his view that the projected 2019 deficit in  Obama's plan would drive up current interest rates thus frustrating  the  2009 recovery which is his immediate goal.

The other guests,for the most part,  stared into space ,glanced at their watches or otherwise occupied themselves until NF finished.

And then carried on an economic discussion among economists.

Krugman ,courteously I thought, disagreed with NF.saying there was a world wide savings glut which would ensure against interest rates becoming a problem.

 In the following  weeks interest rates did escalate by a couple of percentage points ( or two hundred basis points as you might learn by taking  my course in "Teaching Wall Street Jargon  as a Second Language"). Which was followed by an NF  FT op ed last  Weekend modestly declaring hs defeat of the assembled forces of Keynesdom as personifed by Krugman. Interest rates had indeed risen said he and Obama's plan was failing just as he had warned and The End Was Near.

I'd expected Krugman to enter the fray but instead the next round was a column by the FT's impeccably conservative Martin Wolf. The interest rate rise over the last 3 weeks was indeed  significant  said he. It proved Obama's plan was working.,The true danger continued Wolf had been  deflation. And Obama/Geithner had slain it and left its lifeless body ornamented with a cross stuck  in its heart.

Digression. Deflation kills economies. It means that if you spend a buck to buy a widget  intended for resale, when you do resell it , it'll be for 98 cents.Not a way to make a profit. 

Consequently,said Wolf, the recent rise in rates showed  the market believed Obama had preserved us from Deflation so normal  business could be resumed.

Stung by this rejection of his own self adulation from Saturday NF returned to the attack  by striking out at Wolf in a letter in today's FT.Whose graceful  passages I quoted above.

Why do intelligent , well edited publications like the NYR or the FT give the guy column inches ? You might well ask

My theory is that an English accent will get you anywhere.As is so unfortunately true of  Christopher Snitchens. Particularly if you are able to support yourself by polishing up the handle of the big front door , issuing irrelevant proclamations and pretending they're serious positions. 

   

.

 

 

 


11 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Between the accent, and his academic titles at Harvard, he probably intimidates the press. Plus there's nothing like a good hissy fit between academic celebrities to increase sales.

user-pic

nothing like a good hissy fit between academic celebrities to increase sales

That is one wise pig.

user-pic

Methinks you have "Nialled" It, Flavius! What is often humorous is to take a look at some of the assumptions that underscore these economists' outlook. Like:

1.) a healthy General Motors is great for our domestic economy, and
2.) General Motors will only become healthy if they eliminate Union pay scales and legacy benefits and move their manufacturing offshore to access cheap labor and thus become "competitive."

Unless you are well-entrenched in the leisure class on Wall Street, such a prospect that leaves little opportunity for a working person to earn a sustainable living here in the United States will understandably make you nervous. The fact that Ferguson (and even Geitner and some of the others) don't understand this only highlights how truly f*cked we all are.

user-pic

Ferguson is a better historian than he is economist (good thing since he is an historian not an economist, albeit specializing in financial and economic history). He’s also a very good writer - good style and readability with occasional touches of understated humor. I’ve read most of the books he’s written and some were excellent (haven’t gotten to the two most recent yet). As he got into doing the TV documentary thing I found his books less satisfying (maybe why I haven’t pushed as hard at getting around to his most recent books when I used to look for them as soon as they came out). It sometimes seemed to me that he was maybe on some kind of ego trip after all the attention he’d been getting for his earlier work. And he seems to have gotten more conservative as time goes by, or he’s expressing it more openly maybe. Anyway, in this current episode he’s not looking nearly as impressive as he did a decade ago (The House of Rothschild, his best). I never found a video of the New York Review of Books/PEN event, only audio. Ferguson sounded pretty annoying and I’d have liked to see as well as hear them.

user-pic

I've only read the transcript in the NYR.

Somewhere I've read that his behavior at the Symposium was unprofessional- barbed interjections perhaps mostly directed at Krugman. So far Krugman has had the good sense not to reply in kind.

I've never read his books. Heard him interviewed at few times and read occasional pieces in the NYR,the FT and the Times. Like you I at first found him interesting whether or not I agreed with his underlying philosophy-if I even knew what it was. As time passed, less so.And my current attitude is clear above.

user-pic

Ferguson certainly did his best to dominate the conversation, not what I’d call very professional or courteous. I think even in his earlier days at Oxford he had a bit of a “bad boy” reputation. Since being lured to the US by universities competing to get him his attitude seems to have deteriorated. I don’t think Krugman likes bickering of this kind.

If you have any interest in banking history, The House of Rothschild is really very good. It was two volumes, each of them rather fat and heavy. The second volume wasn’t as good as the first, mostly because the Rothschilds weren’t as prominent in the later period so there wasn’t as much to pack into the text. (Full disclosure, I'm a European history addict of long standing.)

user-pic

Neither Fergusen nor Wolf nor anyone else has the slightest idea why UST rates have moved up so substantially over the past eleven weeks.

It can be said that volatility as represented by the VIX has fallen by a third since 3/30/2009. That reduction suggests that "fear" -- the emotion which drives overinvestment in Treasuries -- has subsided. If so, money invested in Treasuries has likely migrated to stocks and corporate bonds.

Less demand means lower prices.

Q.E.D.

user-pic

Interested?

Here's a chart. You can set the time frames by clicking on the listed time periods located directly below the chart.

user-pic

Wow.
So 3 change points: July 2007, Sept 2008 and March 1 2009.

I'm tempted to do just what I criticized Ferguson for: drawing overly firm conclusions from unanalyzed short term data.

My friend Cal was a corporate comptroller expected to provide a useful analysis of the relationship between operations and earnings. During the month he noted abnormal incidents and put a slip in the left hand drawer for each bad one and a slip in the right for good ones. Usually that allowed him to satisfy management but one month he heard the earnings variance incorrectly and started reading from the wrong drawer.Had to quickly correct by adding "but they were offset by....."

At least Cal was aware of real events. Almost never the case with analysts following any company in which I was an insider.

user-pic

Agree that no one can be sure.


user-pic

Interesting blog, Flavius. The few times I've read anything about Ferguson, I thought he sounded a bit like a kook. I haven't felt enough curiosity about him to pursue it further. You've more or less confirmed my impression of him. Thanks for the information.

Leave a comment

flavius

user-pic

Following: 1
Followers: 27

Posts
Comments & Recommends


  • Location Long Island
  • Party Democratic
  • Politics slightly left of the party's center

Favorites

  • Favorite Blogs Brad Delong
  • Favorite Books Skidelsky's biography of Keynes; Naipaul's "In a Free State"
  • Favorite Quotes First they came for the socialists and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out etc. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out etc. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.

Bio

Worked outside the US for 15 years.

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address