Let me see if I understand this. Timothy Geithner, President Obama’s nomination for Treasury Secretary, worked for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and was President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This makes him a money guru, right? But, the same guy didn’t pay all of his taxes while an IMF employee and employed a housekeeper whose immigration status is questionable. Regardless of the legality of his tax situation, it’s clearly not morally correct. This is the guy to manage the $700 billion Wall Street bailout?
A key concern is Geithner prepared his own tax returns for most of his years at the IMF. There’s no second party to blame, yet his unpaid social security taxes didn’t matter until the IRS audited him. If he’s IMF and Federal Reserve material, he knows fiscal law, so the “I didn’t know” excuse doesn’t cut it. While some of Mr. Geithner’s past due Social Security taxes were beyond the IRS’ statute of limitations, he paid them only because of his nomitation for Treasury Secretary. Otherwise, they would still be taxes owed but never paid. That seems more like business as usual than change in government to me.
How much interaction do you think there is between the President of the Federal Reserve Bank in New York—Timothy Geithner’s present position—and the Wall Street investment firms and big commercial banks? I suspect quite a bit. In my mind, that puts Mr. Geithner right in the middle of the “perfect storm” which has yielded a global economic downturn. Is this the guy we want in charge of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout? Don’t forget, this package has still not trickled down to us, the average folk.
To be perfectly honest, it seems Obama wants to put a tax cheat in charge of the $700 billion bailout. Never mind whatever culpability the guy has for the current economic crisis from his tenure as New York Federal Reserve President. Oh, yeah, and let’s not forget he had a seat at the table in developing that $700 billion Wall Street bailout. The whole thing just doesn’t seem right; urge your senators to vote no.