Geithner Says TARP Can’t Help U.S. States Solve Budget Crises (we only help banksters)

[Robbien]

Source: Bloomberg

May 21 (Bloomberg) -- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the U.S.’s $700 billion financial rescue package can’t be used to aid cities and states facing budget crises.

The law “does not appear to us to provide a viable way of responding to that challenge,” Geithner told a House Appropriations subcommittee in Washington today. Among the hurdles: Money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program is reserved for financial companies, he said.

. . .

Still, mayors and governors must get deficits down so their cities and states can raise their own funds, Geithner said. The federal government “may be able to help in some ways, but they are going to carry the primary burden,” he said of the state and local officials.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aaizmTjKpTlw&refer=home

---

Geithner to California: Drop Dead

[villager]

1. will be interesting to see how this administration's re-election fundraising goes in California

...in '12, if they "hold fast" to this position...

[FrenchieCat]

3. 50 Billion wasn't enough, hey?

If Geithner hold fast to THE FUCKING FACT that the law doesn't allow TARP money to be given to states?

Am I dealing with a bunch of Imbeciles on this site or what? :shrug:

[JDPriestly]

17. Geithner should leave quietly now. He is just an extension of

Paulson. Obama needs a totally new economic team. The team he now has is leading the entire nation and his administration in particular to disaster.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. Looks like they're doing a pretty good job to me.

Obama inherited the worst ecomonic crisis since the Great Depression, and four months later they're starting to turn it around.

I know the Obama ankle-biters don't like it. Too bad for them.

[JDPriestly]

24. Granted, Obama inherited the worst economic crisis ---

so why does he continue to employ at the top of his economic team the very people who allowed that crisis to occur. It makes no sense. Obama inherited the crisis, but is making it his own by continuing to act based on the very theories and ideas that caused the crisis in the first place.

It's as if your car runs of the road into a corn field, so you just continue to drive further into the corn field. No, you shift gears, reverse, turn around or, if you can't do that, you call a tow truck. Obama is just proceeding in the same direction that the Bush administration was going. Won't work. He needs a brand new team to clean house. Geithner has too much interest in hiding what really happened during the Bush administration. Geithner is too closely tied to Goldman Sachs and AIG. He is basically their servant, not ours, at this point. And everything Geithner is, Obama is. That's why I am critical.

[Iowa]

31. No they aren't...

"...four months later they're starting to turn it around."

No they aren't. They're just inflating the same balloon - only this time they're doing it with taxpayer money. It will seem like things are getting better for awhile, but they're just kicking the can down the road a ways. It's just a continuation of the Bush approach. Same ideology, different suits.

GW Bush... 2000-2012 - the first three-term president since FDR.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. What are you going to do...

when the economy keeps recovering?

[JDPriestly]

66. Don't hold your breath, HiFructosePronSyrup

Until you see a lot of jobs unfilled, there is no improvement. We are still bleeding jobs.

[Iowa]

70. If you are referring to investments, I'll probably do nothing if that occurs...

...but I think we'll probably see another big US stock market decline before we see a straight-up recovery... the under-pinnings just aren't sound now, IMO. I tend to buy stocks when most people sell, and sell when most buy. I actually did buy a fair amount when the S&P was below 750 awhile back. I'm in a holding pattern now, and still below my typical stock allocation. I have a stock/bond/cash/real-estate allocation range that I can live with long-term, and the stock allocation is toward the low end of that range now. So if you are right, I'll probably just hold until the next bust (with some selling as prices rise to maintain the current allocation).

But so much depends on people having decent paying jobs, and I don't see much in the pipeline that's going to be able to keep pace with all the vanishing jobs. I would be thrilled to be wrong on this, so I'm definitely rooting for you, but not betting my money on you.

[Old Hob]

73. how is it turning around exactly?

[truedelphi]

62. California's budgetary woes represent one fifth of ONE PERCENT

Of the nine trillion dollars that Paulson, Bernancke and Geithner have leaked from Main street to Wall Street.

Yet in California, our governor is planning on asking Bernancke or Geithner for a "Loan" of nine billion to hold off the wolves at the door - when we Californians have paid some 900 Billion towards that leakage.

[JDPriestly]

65. Our budget problems grew out of the same illegal activities

by the banks that caused the bankers' problems.

[villager]

22. The question, I think , is whether he continues to use TARP as an excuse

to do "nothing" as California continues to circle the fiscal drain, while still allowing banksters to live large off the public... largesse....

It would be imbecilic politics on their part, I agree...

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

5. I suspect by 2012 there could be a mainstream undercurrent for independence

While this state is significantly the author of its own woes, the degree to which California subsidizes the rest of the country won't go unnoticed as the crisis deepens. California is short changed 25 cents of every federal tax dollar and much of what is spent in California is fruitless spending on the military.

[Igel]

59. And yet it can't balance its state budget.

That's the problem: The money that goes to the federal government is simply a function of overall higher costs/income. In other words, the progressive tax that we all love screws California over royally because it doesn't take into account cost/income parity.

"Fruitless" spending on the military produces jobs. In some cases, it produces engineering and manufacturing. In some cases it provides money to providers of services and material, such as fuel or roofing. In other cases it produces military salaries. Mind you, we've just had the debate as to whether direct payments to lower-income people who are forced to spend nearly every dollar of their income on essentials are a good thing. Overwhelming the opinion was that such spending is *better* than other many other kinds of spending (ok, granted opinion was driven by wanting "our guy" to be seen as far superior to our foes, not always by citing all of the best economic minds, but still ... I get whiplash from the speed with which political-expedience-driven change in opinion happens).

[truedelphi]

72. Like I said slightly up thread of here

California's budgetary woes represent one fifth of ONE PERCENT of the nine trillion dollars leaked by Geithner and Bernanke to the Banksters on Wall Street from us little people on Main Street.

So it irkw me no end to hear of Schwartzennegger mentioning that maybe he'll see a "Loan" from either Treasury or the Fed to help tide Californai over.

Cosnidering that California is one tenth the population of the USA, then the nine trillions divided by our population here in CA means we should be able to get 900 BILLION, not nine billion.

Fair is fair and all that.

[FrenchieCat]

2. It literally can't be used. You can be a simpleton and blame Geithner all you want,

that doesn't change the law!

California got its share of the Stimulus package, and as a Californian,
it isn't the Fed's job to "Save" a state....Arnold didn't do a very good job,
from the time he came into office, and there is no "State" magic pill that will make
things all the better. We do not live in DisneyFuckingLand!

----------------------------------

More Than $50 billion in Stimulus Money for California

The California Budget Project just published an analysis of the stimulus bill. The analysis is relevant for our community, so I'm reproducing the press release below. The full report can be found here. You can also visit the official state site: the California Economic Recovery Portal.

SACRAMENTO -- A new analysis by the California Budget Project, a nonpartisan public policy research group, examines the impact of the federal economic recovery package on the state. The report, What Does the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Mean for California?, outlines the more than $50 billion in federal funds that California and Californians could receive from the package of spending and tax measures.

"This is great news for California, particularly since many of the provisions in this package will directly benefit low- and middle-income Californians struggling during these difficult economic times," said CBP Executive Director Jean Ross.

The report estimates that California could receive:

Nearly $18 billion in temporary increases in federal funding designed to help states balance their budgets. This includes a temporary $11.2 billion increase in funds for Medicaid (Medi-Cal in California); $4.9 billion in education block grant funds for K-12 and higher education; and $1.1 billion in flexible block grant funds for education; $2.6 billion for highway and bridge construction projects; $1.8 billion in child tax credits, providing assistance to an estimated 2.3 million California children; $1.5 billion to increase SNAP benefits (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), which would help nearly 2.5 million low-income Californians; $1.5 billion in Title I grants for schools with a high concentration of students from low-income families; $1.3 billion for special education, which will help an estimated 677,000 students in California; and $1.0 billion to purchase buses and public transit equipment.

Ross noted that the report identifies multiple sources of funds that can be used to meet the $10 billion "trigger" included as part of the recent state budget agreement. The recent budget agreement includes provisions that would cut spending for IHSS, Medi-Cal, courts, higher education, and other programs and trigger an additional personal income tax increase unless the Director of Finance and State Treasurer certify that that California can expect to receive at least $10 billion in federal funds that can offset state costs by June 30, 2010.
http://harrioak.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-than-50-billion-in-stimulus-money.html

[Romulox]

7. "it isn't the Fed's job to "Save" a state" But it's its job to save foreign banks?

:silly:

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[brentspeak]

23. Oh, foreign banks weren't given TARP monies DIRECTLY!

What a relief! That makes it better! Yay! And we now own a good portion of AIG -- which means...what, and who cares? That proves Geithner, Obama's man, isn't a crook or else a total stooge. Because foreign banks got their taxpayer billions only indirectly...

[Romulox]

45. Your lack of civility betrays your insecurity. nt

[FrenchieCat]

49. Perhaps I'm just tired of the Bullshit Dramatics!

Perhaps if everything wasn't about blaming someone,
and seeing what we each could do, things might be better.

I write to the White House, various senator and Congresscritters,
nearly every day. I call and write to the media on the other days.
I'm educating myself on what happened and why, and have joined groups
that I believe will help get to where I want to go....
and short of running for office, that is all that I can do.

Call it insecurity if you like.
I don't really care.

[JDPriestly]

67. I live in California. I bought my house long before sub-prime

mortgages were an apple in the eyes of the mortgage companies. (And, by the way, I bought it because it was the cheapest house I could find and the only one we could afford.) I always pay my share of taxes. I had no part in any action that brought about our economic crises. I'm not to blame. I'm pointing my finger at those who are to blame -- and among them is the leadership at the NY Fed when this storm was looming, namely Geithner. He is to blame.

Even at the last minute as the lightening was striking Wall Street, these bankers focused on researching Elliot Spitzer's account transfers rather than on doing something about the banking crisis. And at the head of the New York Fed at that time sat Geithner. Obama would be well-served to fire him.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. Imagine how shit out of luck California would be if Obama hadn't saved the banks.

[Romulox]

46. Is there such a thing as "super-duper insolvent"??? nt

[JDPriestly]

21. So, the feds can bail out bank investors after the banks wasted

their money on fraudulent schemes. But the feds cannot bail out people on subsistence, on welfare in one of the 50 states -- which happens to be California, home to more immigrants than any other state in the union. Makes no sense. A part of our problem here in California is the immigration policy of the U.S. government. Nothing against immigrants. I'm married to one, but the state that welcomes new immigrants also welcomes a lot of expenses that other states don't face. That is a lot of California's problem.

I voted against the propositions because I was not given a meaningful alternative that would have raised the property taxes on properties owned by corporations. That could have solved our problem to a great extent.

[dmosh42]

4. They are only giving it to Morgan, Stanley, and some hedge funds...

so they can speculate in the energy market! (Gasoline!)

[Robeson]

6. It wasn't supposed to.

[Cant trust em]

8. That's what stimulus money is for. NT

[sandnsea]

10. No shit

WTF is wrong with people anyway. I expect this from the right, but why does the left jump on anything just to be on an attack wagon.

[Robeson]

12. "...jump on anything just to be on an attack wagon."....

...welcome to DU! :hi:

[Cant trust em]

13. That was my thought exactly.

It's way more fun to jump on the internet and gripe about how other people have fucked things up.

[fascisthunter]

28. there's a big difference... we pay them!

[pinniped]

9. Write some new rules and fire up those money printers.

.

[w4rma]

11. The TARP is the biggest crock of BS laws I've ever heard of.

Those banks should be allowed to go BANKRUPT. Other entities that saw all of this coming would have bought up their assets and things would get better, not worse.

[Zynx]

34. Banks cannot legally go into Chapter 11.

Lehman was not a commercial bank, just to head that one off. Also, didn't that one go well?

[w4rma]

36. Then their assets should have been liquidated and sold off. (nt)

[truedelphi]

63. Banks can legally be held in receivorship by the government rather than

Having the taxpayers offer such huge sums to supposedly buoy up those institutions so that they, in turn, will offer loans to us.

But the loans will still not be made. Kucinich says that the banks will use the assets offered them to buy up our local utilities.

Here's part three of the Moyers and Black interview - but parts one and two are very informative also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYGCNkkLuZ4

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. Why do I get the feeling...

That if Geithner and the Obama admin were bailing out the states (in fact they are, Cali got billions from the stimulus package), you'd find a way to be complaining about it?

[FrenchieCat]

16. It all seems easy, doesn't it.....

whining cause one can.

I live in California, and there was much that could have been done that wasn't.

Enron put us in the position that we have remained in throughout Arnold's reign.
He was an active participant in that rip-off, and now the shit has fallen apart.

The Fed aren't Santa Claus, even if some would wish it.

50 Billion in stimulus is an awful lot of fucking money! This means without it,
we'd be 71 Billion in the hole!

[JDPriestly]

68. I agree that Schwarzenegger is personally responsible for

most of the bad decisions. Most important, he is unable to reign in the extremists in his own party.

[Mari333]

20. god forbid they go after corporations that OUTSOURCE JOBS

which in turn bankrupts state budgets when no one has jobs here.
God forbid they do that..no, they just send our tax money to the goddamned corporations so they can invest in overseas jobs.
Geithner can kiss my ass.

[FrenchieCat]

25. Yeah....Ok.....what-E-ver.....

:eyes:

Obama moves to curb outsourcing
WASHINGTON: In a major decision that could hurt outsourcing of jobs to India and other countries, US President Barack Obama on Monday has proposed removal of tax incentives to American companies shifting jobs abroad, besides cracking down on overseas tax havens.

Hitting out at the loopholes in the country’s corporate tax code, Obama commented: ‘‘It’s a tax code that says you should pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York.’’

In proposals that would hit US corporations with overseas divisions, Obama said removal of tax deductions to firms that earn profits in countries with low tax rates and closing other loopholes would net $ 210 billion in additional tax collections over the next decade. As he put it, his proposals would make it “more profitable for companies to create jobs here in the US”. Outlining his plan to work with the Congress to restore fairness and balance to the tax code, he said: ‘‘That’s what I promised I would do during the campaign, that’s what I’m committed to doing as President.’’

For years, there has been talk about ending tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas and giving tax breaks to companies creating jobs here in America, Obama said adding his budget would finally make this happen. ‘‘We will stop letting American companies that create jobs overseas take deductions on their expenses when they do not pay any American taxes on their profits. And we will use the savings to give tax cuts to companies that are investing in research and development here at home so that we can jumpstart job creation, foster innovation, and enhance America’s competitiveness.
More...
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Obama+moves+to+curb+outsourcing&artid=CZz0hRBW71Y=



Published: May 5, 2009
The president vowed Monday to overhaul a tax code that allowed companies to pay less tax, as he put it, to “create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York.” One element to that change could be the elimination of a deduction for American companies when they invest in subsidiaries outside the United States.
snip
Some big American companies have large numbers of employees in India. For example, General Electric has about 14,500 employees in India, I.B.M. more than 74,000, and Citigroup more than 10,000. In addition, India’s information technology and outsourcing companies employ about 2.2 million people, and American companies account for about 60 percent of their business.

“The jobs aren’t coming back to the U.S. as a result of this proposal,” Mr. Wiacek said. The tax proposal is “about revenues and that’s it.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/business/global/06tax.html

[Mari333]

26. and when he said that I gave him kudos

but I havent seen anything since. in the meantime, the TARP monies are already being used to outsource jobs. that could have been ONE of the stipulations of the TARP funds..no monies allowed to be used to create overseas jobs, period, or no loan.

[FrenchieCat]

29. Yeah.....like Washington D.C. is the place that you announce

your plan one day, and it become law the next....NOT.

Look, you make a statement, and I offered you proof that you were mistaken in attempting to make believe that this issue hadn't been addressed JUST TWO FUCKING WEEKS AGO!

Ya'll must really believed that Obama was going to be that Magic Negro.

Totally ridiculous this expectation that Obama can make right everyfucking thing wrong
in one hot minute.

Those who say that Obama "fans" believe he is the Messiah are totally off base.
It is those who criticize him for not doing all that they demand immediately or else,
who believe him to be a Messiah....obviously. :eyes:

I'm tired of the unreasonability around here.

[progressoid]

39. Interesting, it took JUST TWO FUCKING WEEKS to debate and pass TARP.

JUST TWO FUCKING WEEKS to pour billions into corporations bank accounts.

I guess if there is a will there is a way.

[FrenchieCat]

43. What was happening that made that be so?

and what happened to get us to a point of needing TARP?

Do you care, or is just demonizing Geithner going to help you sleep better at night?

[progressoid]

47. Sleep better at night? That's a laugh..

60% of my clients have cut me out of their budgets. Sleeping isn't really an option for me. If I could afford it, I'd be drinking myself to sleep.

It's a matter of priorities. And our government seems to be favoring those at the top first.



As for demonizing Geithner, he doesn't need any help from me. He does pretty well all by himself.

[FrenchieCat]

48. Like I said, seems like the accusation of villain as moved from those who actually

caused this mess in a long run, to those who are attempting to do something about it.

It is an elementary exercise of simplicity at best.

As for those on top.....the fact that these entities were bailed out,
means that the global financial collapse didn't happen in a
way that it could have....and had it occured, your story of suffering
would be much more dire....as would those of millions upon millions
of hard working individual, that had nothing to do with this shit,
including those who never even had a mortgage or owned a house!
Remember the economy was already in the Crapper long before TARP.

But of course, this is too complex a thought.
Better to act like we can trash whomever for whatever.

Feel good society is still on a roll, no matter how we can get our feel good on.
That part is not important.
Cause we are really smart and stuff. We know.

[progressoid]

52. Good grief, Geithner has been in bed with these guys for years.

He's trying to fix what he and his buddies were involved in breaking. It's like going to a mobster to get your kneecap operated on....by a baseball bat. Thanks a lot.

Add Larry Summers is a whack to the other kneecap.


It's true, this is an exercise in simplicity. Geithner, Summers, et.al. are looking out for those at the top. Simple as that. EOM.

[Zhade]

35. Talk is cheap.

Considering he keeps breaking promises, I'm not holding my breath.

[FrenchieCat]

37. Don't hold your breath......

No one asked you to.

[Mari333]

38. its very cheap

and hes already given the money to the bankers who are merrily creating jobs overseas as we speak.
had that been part of the stipulation.. NO TARP FUNDS FOR COMPANIES WHO OUTSOURCE..at the beginning, we wouldnt be having this argument.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Your talk sounds just as cheap.....

The point of TARP was to save us from Financial Collapse.
The beginning of that situation occured when Bush was in office.

Perhaps concentrating on how we got to where Financial Institutions needed savings
would be more productive, as would finding out who allowed jobs to be outsourced without
repercussions, instead of attempting to find villains in those who are attempting to make
a totally shitty ass situation of possible financial collapse less of a reality.

[Mari333]

42. we could have changed the rules when Obama came in

we didnt. we continued with Bush's program.

[FrenchieCat]

44. The rules on what?

You mean Obama could have done what you wanted him to do
and be this Radical Socialist that he never said he was,
and that the Right continues to attack him of being....
Yeah....he could have nationalized the banks...like that was some kind of panacea,
till it wouldn't have been.

Yes, everything always seems like an easy answer,
when reality is not a factor.


According to those who know, Obama did change how things were being tracked.

According to the TARP protection watchdog, they can account for all that Obama is doing
with the portion of TARP that he got.

[aldo]

27. Is it possible to make a citizen's arrest of Geithner for illegal diversion of public funds?

Of course he along with Bernanke and Paulson deserve being actually arrested. Geithner's loyalty is not to the U.S. but to the Fed and globalism.

[FrenchieCat]

32. Your remarks are not even based on anything but being able to type.

We didn't elect a Radical Socialist like the Right Claims.
Deal with it. Obama is more of a capitalist than a socialist pure and simple.
And that is exactly what he claimed all throughout the campaign.

In less than 4 years, you can campaign to elect whatever socialist you like.
Till then, Geithner is not breaking any fucking laws, and neither is Obama.....
and in fact, you are probably better off not knowing what might have happened
if no one would have intervened in the markets.

It's not what was done to save the markets that was the crime,
it is how the markets got to where they needed saving at all that
should be at issue.

But go ahead and make accusations and all of that which doesn't do jack shit,
if that helps you feel superior without truly solving a doggone thing!

[pansypoo53219]

30. california made their NO NEW TAXES bed.

let them eat tax cuts.

[Zynx]

33. The law would have to be obscenely broadly interpreted.

Also, California has the means to fix its own problems. It just doesn't want to.

[Fire1]

50. What the fuck does TARP have to do with STATE

budgets??? You people are fuckin losing it. The stimulus money isn't enough?? It's up to the GOVERNORS of each state to distribute and allocate that money AS THEY SEE FUCKIN FIT to benefit their own state. Gee Whizz!

[Robeson]

51. Sshhh....

...you're spoiling the meltdown.

[w4rma]

53. Supposedly the TARP money was supposed to make it so that lenders would lend, but they aren't

lending to California, even though they just received billions and billions of taxpayer money.

[Fire1]

55. I repeat. That has NOTHING to do with STATE budgets.

[w4rma]

56. Yes it does. The TARP money was supposed to *trickle down* to the state budgets through lending

And to every other budget through more loans and more credit cards and by making Americans more indebted to the banks.

[Fire1]

57. Wrong.

[w4rma]

58. I'm right and you know it. (nt)

[Fire1]

61. Sorry. Google is your friend.

[w4rma]

64. I Googled it and found that I'm correct. (nt)

[Fire1]

75. You are wrong. The Housing & Economic Recovery Act of 2008

(Stimulus Package) DIFFERS from TARP in that it was designed to create new jobs. TARP is a RESCUE package aimed at stabilizing financial institutions in an effort to jump start the economy. Two ENTIRELY different proposals.

[DebbieCDC]

54. Go back to wall street asshole

[Telly Savalas]

60. Geithner didn't come from Wall Street.

And nobody here has come up with an interpretation of the bailout law whereby TARP is authorized to lend to state governments.

I'm not a real huge fan of the guy, but I generally try to make sure my misgivings with Geithner are based on reality.

[Wednesdays]

69. K&R

:kick:

[autorank]

71. William K. Black was right.

William K. Black: Geithner will destroy Obama Apr 13, 2009
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123940701204709985.html?page=sp

Barrons Interview

It is worse than a lie. Geithner has appropriated the language of his critics and of the forthright to support dishonesty. That is what's so appalling -- numbering himself among those who convey tough medicine when he is really pandering to the interests of a select group of banks who are on a first-name basis with Washington politicians.

The current law mandates prompt corrective action, which means speedy resolution of insolvencies. He is flouting the law, in naked violation, in order to pursue the kind of favoritism that the law was designed to prevent. He has introduced the concept of capital insurance, essentially turning the U.S. taxpayer into the sucker who is going to pay for everything. He chose this path because he knew Congress would never authorize a bailout based on crony capitalism.

Geithner is mistaken when he talks about making deeply unpopular moves. Such stiff resolve to put the major banks in receivership would be appreciated in every state but Connecticut and New York. His use of language like "legacy assets" -- and channeling the worst aspects of Milton Friedman -- is positively Orwellian. Extreme conservatives wrongly assume that the government can't do anything right. And they wrongly assume that the market will ultimately lead to correct actions. If cheaters prosper, cheaters will dominate. It is like Gresham's law: Bad money drives out the good. Well, bad behavior drives out good behavior, without good enforcement.

His plan essentially perpetuates zombie banks by mispricing toxic assets that were mispriced to the borrower and mispriced by the lender, and which only served the unfaithful lending agent.

Snip

Unless the current administration changes course pretty drastically, the scandal will destroy Barack Obama's presidency.

William K Black on Looting the Treasury and Other Financial Frauds = Continually Updated

[HamdenRice]

74. Where in the TARP law does it say he could use the money for states? I've read the entire law

and it specifies what the money can be used for, and nowhere does it say the money can be used for state budgets.

I suppose you could also say that the TARP money can't be used to maintain the Hubble Space Telescope. Would you consider that also to be a scandal?

Would you rather another law-breaking administration like the Bush administration?

What is wrong with people?

[hadrons]

76. I hate to say it, but Geithner's right .....

I'm no fan of his or TARP, but Geithner's right on this.