So let's revisit the tax issue:
<I>... it
makes no sense to disqualify him for what is by all accounts some
careless mistakes made several years ago. NOBODY is alleging deliberate
fraud or evasion.<./I>
So now everyone knows he cheated on his taxes. What do you think now?
<I>... it
makes no sense to disqualify him for what is by all accounts some
careless mistakes made several years ago. NOBODY is alleging deliberate
fraud or evasion.<./I>
So now everyone knows he cheated on his taxes. What do you think now?
3 comments:
Apparently you and I have different information sources, because I was not of the understanding that was what "everyone" thought.
I have read that Geithner's errors were more egregious than Daschle's, though less in scope. The other woman whose confirmation was yanked did so over only a few hundred dollars, so there's probably some other back story there. But I have not heard anything new about Geithner that makes me revise my original thoughts -- that this was probably careless, possible deliberate, and irrelevant either way.
Coming back in a bit more detail, the other reason this does not particularly concern me is that Geithner's bona fides are impeccable. This guy is a career civil servant, at tremendous opportunity cost. He was well-paid for his various gigs -- in the $400K range, but with his background he could have jumped to Goldman Sachs or wherever the hell he chose and commanded tens and hundreds of millions of dollars in personal compensation. He has spent his entire career in public service and never chose to cash in.
My point here is to put his alleged sins in perspective - they're venal. It's like if I were (hypothetically) running an $18 million medical practice but were found to be padding my timesheet. It's bad behavior and indicative of a personality flaw or weakness and should be remedied. But if I'm doing a good job at running the practice, it wouldn't be a good decision to fire me over it.
Okay. Never mind then.
Post a Comment