> I can't read anything by Larry Summers without thinking about this article from Naked Capitalism I'm no fan of Larry Summers, but that article was crap. He w

> I can't read anything by Larry Summers without thinking about this article from Naked Capitalism I'm no fan of Larry Summers, but that article was crap. He was there from 2001-2006, and in 2008 they lost a bunch of money.. which the article says is Summers fault. You know what Harvard said in 2007 about their fund [0]: Harvard University’s endowment earned a 23.0 percent return during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007. With FY07 being one of the best performance years since the inception of Harvard Management Company in 1974 ... In addition to significantly outpacing the University’s total return target, HMC significantly out-performed its internal benchmark. Furthermore, the fiscal 2007 performance compares favorably to that recorded by other large investment management institutions. Specifically, the endowment’s return of 23.0 percent out-performed the median for the 151 large institutional funds as measured by the Trust Universe Comparison Service (17.7 percent), as well as the 20.9 percent that marks the top 5 percentile. The fund posts record gains, but when the economy tanks and everyone loses money, at Harvard it's Summers fault. If he was as terrible as the article says, they had two years after he left to undo the damage he caused. Instead they waited until the recession hit, then unwound it. Actions speak louder than works (not to mention story telling after-the-fact when you need a scapegoat). http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/harvard-endowment-posts-strong-positive-return/ http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/harvard-endowm... Edit: note that the gains in 2007 ($5B) were significantly more than the loses in 2008 ($2B) that summers supposedly caused. Since 2001, the fund nearly doubled(!): http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/09.26/06-endowment.html http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/09.26/06-endowment.html