Comments on: The Banality Of Tim Geithner

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 05:35:11 +0000

It is pointless trying to analyze what is behind the though process of Tim Geithner because there is nothing to analyze. He is an empty suit bureaucrat who has never had a real job in the private sector and has achieved nothing of note other than kissing arse of powerful people (unless you believe being a world class arse kisser a notable achievement).
At the IMF his main accomplishment was destroying the Indonesian economy while at the NY Fed he oversaw the implosion of the financial system, yet was once again promoted and now blames the previous administration (himself) for the mess we are in.
I have worked with numerous IMF/World Bank clones just like Geithner who can speak endlessly without really saying anything. It is amazing that somebody with such little talent has gone so far and it is truly scary that we are relying on him to fix the problems that he played a large role in creating.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 03:28:33 +0000

@11 just cause no one likes him doesn’t amount to a hill of ant chit. Look at the list of people who held the job, who did something more than that? Hamilton did something, but he was the first.
No one needs to like him. Not part of job description.

By: DIV01

DIV01 — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 01:23:14 +0000

Your missive seems to paint Geitner as some sort of Pericles figure. The problem is that he has become an ardent defender of the untenable system at large at a time when many are calling for serious reform. He appears as nothing more than a marionette acting for the interests of the few against those of the majority. Pull apart your argument and Geitner appears to be lying to preserve something that needs to be changed.
“. . .the ultimate cost of averting disaster will be smaller than we once feared.”
That is yet to be determined, especially given near par markings and the vast amount of money we are using to back stop FNM and FRE. And we still have not taken into account CRE. This crisis is not over – it has been temporarily averted.
“No one considers all the alternatives. That would be a profligate waste of valuable time.”
How is prudence and empiric thought a waste of time? Is it not obvious much needs to be done to make changes to the system to enhance its stability? Do taxpayers need to continually back the BDs if they are to fail again? The banks repaid TARP and even threw in a few bones on the side, but what of the massive amounts of guarantees and “back door” funds made available/given to them? If my firm fails, will I too be granted access to such facilities – nyet. Do I have an important financing function for the greater economy – also nyet (but neither do the most profitable parts, FICC-esque, of the banks benefiting from the free money/QE). And at the same time I do not continually demand the preservation of the current system when it is apparent to those without vested interests that it is flawed.
To a former BB guy who is now on the buy side these are important questions to be examined.
End of day, Geitner is the mouth piece for all that is wrong with the current system. And I am not the only “patsy” who feels this way.

By: InfiniteGuest

InfiniteGuest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:18:59 +0000

@10 Pick away. I mean to say he acts as though he were forbidden from doing anything else.
@8 OK but Secretary Geithner is in the news every, yet remains a bit of a sphinx, and nobody-but-nobody likes him. You don’t find that odd at all?

By: guest

guest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:58:23 +0000

Not to pick nits but… did you really mean to use ‘proscribe’ as in forbid.. in the first sentence of your last paragraph. I don’t understand your meaning.
“To an outsider, it may not be at all obvious that Mr. Geithner’s decisions are all so closely proscribed. ”
prescribed, perhaps?

By: InfiniteGuest

InfiniteGuest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:08:09 +0000

@3 Maybe read the first & last paragraphs for a summary and the comments section for laughs.
@5 (merkin capital partners) thanks?

By: guest

guest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:24:09 +0000

When you think about it, no one really gives a flying f about who was Sec of Treasury, its a thankless job and one that will only get you in the chit. I can think of only one good person in that spot… and maybe TG should do some research on Mellon, his ideas were spot on… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_W._Mellon
All others were do nothings and became no ones. Shultz excluded — but only partially.

By: guest

guest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:09:05 +0000

@4 I hear you, and G-Juice is no Donny Baseball

By: merkin capital partners

merkin capital partners — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:38:57 +0000

Agreed @4, plus O’Neill hit two home runs (ok, one was inside the park) for that crippled blond boy.
This post was a fat stack of tldr but the first paragraph was spot on.

By: guest

guest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:11:13 +0000

Wow. Slow day at work, IG?
Can you give the rest of us a two-paragraph summary? Oh, and funny would be nice.

By: Pfluger the Barbarian

Pfluger the Barbarian — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:05:54 +0000

I think of how effective anti-wrinkle creams really are….

By: guest

guest — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:03:06 +0000

obligatory tldr. even the tags sucked