In an interview by Fareed Zakaria, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner revealed (or more, admitted?) that he’d never held a “real job”.  Essentially, since grad school he’s spent his entire professional life in some sort of “policy job”.

Initially, this made me really mad, until I realized that a good portion of those making “policy” haven’t held a real job either.  So Geithner is no odd duck.

Realizing that I’ve got better things to do than be enraged about the people that make up our corrupt government, I moved on to determining what criteria candidates need to get my vote in the future.

A real job is now one of those criteria.

From now on, you need experience in a “real job” to get my vote.  That means a real, no kiddin’ 8 to 5 gig making a no-kiddin’ paycheck.  And you need some tenure too.  None of this, “I worked as an intern as a financial analyst while in school” stuff.

If you want a government job determining how my hard earned tax dollars get spent, you need to have some concept of how my tax dollars are earned.

Business, Finance, Politics job qualifications, Tim Geithner

The returns are in, and again, it’s not pretty.  All told, I owe just shy of $3,000 to the local and federal government, of which $2,400 of that goes to the IRS, headed by Tim Geithner who can’t even pay his own taxes.

I’m disappointed that even after having both our employers withhold the maximum amount allowable (i.e. claiming zero dependents on the W-4 form), having a whopper of a loss in the market last year, that I still end up owing a bunch of money to the federal government.

What irritates me the most though, is not so much that I owe money, it’s knowing that the money I send the government is pissed away by the inefficiencies and reckless spending in Washington.

Face it, there are government programs out there that we all benefit from and consequently should be required to pay for.  The interstate highway system, the postal system, etc.  I have no problem funding those types of programs.  It’s the bacon museum on the East coast that cost us, the taxpayers over $2 million, and all the other useless and wasteful crap that our politicians float into bills that evidently aren’t even read before they’re voted upon.

In all, I paid my home state just over $300, the state which I own rental property just $41, and the state in which I own oil production just under $100.  Effectively, it seems that my state tax obligations are well appropriated throughout the year through monthly deductions and tax payments… it’s just the federal money that’s stuck in my craw.

Maybe I should just jump on the Ed Barnett bandwagon and politely decline to pay taxes this year…

Taxes Ed Barnett, Taxes, Tim Geithner

I’m always interested in how a leader at the top of an enterprise communicates with regard to his own business.  A lot depends on the corporate structure, however there are some leaders that can speak intelligently about any aspect of their company.  Others have a broad understanding for how their business works, and shy on details of minutia.

There are others that must defer every question to the resident expert for that topic.

It’s with that basis for which Barack Obama’s leadership is telling.  The fact that he uses teleprompters for every public communique suggests that while he can pen intelligent prose while sitting at his desk, he can’t speak off the cuff to those details of minutia that the public so dearly wants to hear.  The fact that he won’t answer pointed questions at press conferences reinforces that trait.

The lack of deep minded intelligence from the administration as a whole is also reflected in its policy.

Tim Geithner

Obama’s  Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (see: Oh, I need to pay my taxes?) talked about the tax implications of Obama’s budget proposal on the oil and gas sector earlier this month, and he too revealed a lack of deep-level understanding of the energy sector.

On the tax breaks given to oil and gas companies, Geithner had the following comment while speaking to the Senate Finance Committee:

“We don’t believe it makes sense to significantly subsidize the production and use of sources of energy (like oil and gas) that are dramatically going to add to our climate change (problem). We don’t think that’s good economic policy and we think changing those incentives is good for the country.”

That’s good economic policy?  I think not.  That might be good environmental policy, if it were true.

It takes little critical thinking to realize that, if you believe in the money-making, man-made global warming, any and all contributions to global warming would come from the consumption of petroleum products, not the production of petroleum products.

The government doesn’t increase taxes on cigarette manufacturers whose products are known to cause lung cancer, they increase the taxes on the consumer.

Why would the energy sector be any different?

Because there would be a huge backlash if the government came out and said it was increasing taxes on gasoline and other refined petroleum products because those products may cause global warming.

The administration went further to reveal the lack of understanding by proposing “a $4 per acre annual fee on energy leases in the Gulf that are designated as non producing.  The budget proposal projects the fee would generate $1.2 billion from 2010 to 2019″.

Perhaps someone in Obama’s energy cabinet should explain to the smooth talking President that not every acre out in the big Gulf of Mexico has petroleum reserves on it.  The fact that an oil company hasn’t drilled a well on acreage may mean that there’s no oil or gas to be found on that acreage.

The administration needs to get past the notion that “big oil” is holding back exploration and production in an effort to drive up the price in crude.  The most recent bust of the crude market should be evidence of that, but as the President suggests, we shouldn’t look to the markets to make long-term policy decisions.

Brilliant.

Evidently Geithner suggests that these new policies that roll out of Obama’s budget proposals are justified since the oil and gas companies are making such great money.

The additional taxes “can be absorbed” by the oil and gas companies, given the billions of dollars they have earned from high energy prices. -Tim Geithner, Source

Contrary to the fact that Exxon’s fourth quarter profit decreased 33% due to falling oil and gas prices, the Obama administration thinks that since they’ve made all that money in the past, they should spread the wealth in the future.

“The impact of these subsidies are very small relative to revenues produced by U.S. oil and gas producers.” -Tim Geithner, Source

It’s too bad that Geithner doesn’t understand that not every oil and gas producer has the balance sheet of Chevron or Exxon.  Furthermore, if the government does have the countries best interest at heart and wants to see these major oil producers expand into the renewable energy sector, they would be best served not to put a damper on those efforts through “relatively small tax increases”.

It’s clear to me that the Obama administration is trying to squeeze every dollar out of every nook and cranny in the American economy it can without actually thinking, or understanding where those dollars are actually coming from.

No one from the administration has shown that they can speak intelligently about the economy, finance or the budget, and that lack of intelligence will do our country more harm than good in the long run.  It will only be when real leaders with knowledge of the subjects of which they speak  step to the podium that our economy will start to right itself.

Until then, we wait for the next speech.

Economics, Finance, Politics, Taxes Barack Hussein Obama, budget, oil and gas taxes, Tim Geithner