What Is It With Tim Geithner?

Fascinating piece up at Baseline Scenario (which has whizzed to the top of my must-read list, but let that be) about Tim Geithner and how with all good faith and good intentions he has climbed into the lap of the moneymen. I suppose it is impudent to suggest that there is another and more pointed name for the phenomenon--"Stockholm Syndrome," where (as Wiki recaptulates) "the tendency might well be the result of employing the strategy evolved by newborn babies to form an emotional attachment to the nearest powerful adult in order to maximize the probability that this adult will enable — at the very least — the survival of the child, if not also prove to be a good parental figure."

I wouldn't for a moment want to suggest that Geithner is playing Patty Hearst to to the bankers' Symbionese Liberation Army. Well-- I'm thinking, I'm thinking...

Is There a Confict Here?

The reviews are coming in:

Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed? In normal times, this would be a ludicrous question. But these are not normal times. They are times of great danger. ... What is needed? The answer is: focus and ferocity. If Mr Obama does not fix this crisis, all he hopes from his presidency will be lost.

That's the not-easily frightened Martin Wolf in the Financial Times (link). Compare:

Barack Obama for Treasury Secretary!

... Barack Obama stepped up to show ... how questions about nationalization should be answered: [he made] as clear and well-argued a case for not nationalizing as you could hope to get. ...

That is the not-easily conned Felix Salmon (link). And yes, I am being cute here. The ellipses white out the parts in which Salmon agrees with just about everybody: Geithner laid an egg, and if he doesn't find someway to talk (cluck?) his way out of the problem, he can join the line of unemployed bankers. Salmon seems to differ from the common herd in believing the game is not entirely lost yet. Of course that has to be right. While the chicken littles like are clucking in our own way, this is one news cycle and this game can change at whiplash speed.

Funny thing about Geithner: I had thought he was Larry Summers' errand boy and front man. Seems like I got that one wrong: all reports are that he is an aggressive player in his own right. Dunno, maybe he is good at the inside/operations/dealmaking thing. But he certainly did not have a good day.

Penalty Up

Daniel Shaviro flags us to an interesting item I had missed--a New York Times online chat about the Daschle/Geithner tax problems. I'm no tax lawyer (though I am burrowing through my own paperwork this week, grr) but I am pretty much willing to sign on to Shaviro's view:

I myself rated what they did as pretty bad - highly self-serving "mistakes" though short of fraud - and suggested that they voluntarily pay the Treasury what in effect would be self-imposed penalties.

I'd have a tough time reaching a conclusion of outright fraud here. I'm inclined to suspect that Geithner is a chiseler and that Daschle--who knows? People do make mistakes that stupid. The puzzling part is that in both cases, we've got public men who by nature aspire to some new public office. You'd think the first order of business would be to keep on board the best possible tax adviser, and to make sure you put out these fires before they arise.