On June 2, I wrote about the IRS conferences being held between 2010 and 2012. During that period, the inspector general’s report indicated the agency spent upwards of $50 million on conferences. About a year ago, then Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner – or someone answering his mail – outright lied and claimed the department had only spent $500,000 on conferences between 2005 and 2012.
Obama administration staffers discussing President Obama’s proposed balanced approach to reducing the deficit a few dollars – there is no interest in discussing the debt or unfunded future liabilities – have shown little or no interest in spending cuts.
Hey, when you’re trying to run an expanding federal government, seeking permission from the people to spend more and more money we don’t have is a bloody inconvenience. When asked if we should ditch the debt limit all-together, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner agrees with Alan Greenspan – spend away!
“Well, this is something only Congress can solve,” Geithner said. “Congress put it on itself. We’ve had 100 years of experience with it, and I think only once–last summer–did people decide to use it to threaten default on the American credit for the first time in history as a tool for political advantage. And that’s not a tenable strategy.”
Hunt then asked: “Is now the time to eliminate it?”
“It would have been time a long time ago to eliminate it,” Geithner said. “The sooner the better.”
What? Is the debt limit and the national debt such a “pure” economic concept it should not be discussed within the political arena?
I understand you can derive a debt limit using a dollar figure like we do now, but we could also set a debt limit based on a percentage of GDP or something could we not? But note the attitude of Geithner … he thinks the entire idea of a limit is stupid.
A question for Geithner. What is wrong with the limit? Is there some sort of economic issue with having a limit? If we got rid of the limit, would that somehow improve the economic outlook of the United States? Is that looming debt limit holding us back in some way, shape or form?
I’ll argue that having a limit – even if Congress has to discuss raising it at regular intervals – certainly does not hurt the economy and it brings forward the spending discussion to the American people on a regular basis. That’s a good thing.
But people like Geithner do not like that idea simply because the unwashed masses don’t understand economics like he does…
Replaying the same old song. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was interviewed this morning on CNBC and one of the discussions was taxes. He thinks fortunate Americans should pay more, but the press never asks how much more would be enough.
Ten years. That’s all they give a crap about. The goal here is to get re-elected and kick the can down the road.
I debated whether or not I would post this, because it’s just so doggone depressing. But it’s also refreshing to hear this coming from someone in the administration. Yesterday Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, when asked the question how long this recession will continue, he responds … oh why should I spoil the surprise video below the fold. Read more
There’s an old joke about how snakes don’t bite lawyers out of professional courtesy. But tax cheats? Read more
A Christmas Eve White House decision that nobody will notice. President Obama and his treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, have elected to increase loss coverage for the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from $200 billion to unlimited for the next three years.
OK, the video is juicy and it’s fun to watch a very smart woman smack down the wizard of smart (H/T Rush). But, to truly enjoy Professor Warren’s performance and Tim Geithner’s squirm, you need some background. Read more
It’s just too good to pass up. The best part is they say it with a straight face. The president said he intends to close loopholes that actually were put in place during the Clinton administration to allow companies to compete more effectively overseas. Read more