REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
This is circulating around trading desks today . . .
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
DEAR AMERICAN:
I NEED TO ASK YOU TO SUPPORT AN URGENT SECRET BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH A TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF GREAT MAGNITUDE.
I AM MINISTRY OF THE TREASURY OF THE REPUBLIC OF AMERICA. MY COUNTRY HAS HAD CRISIS THAT HAS CAUSED THE NEED FOR LARGE TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF 800 BILLION DOLLARS US. IF YOU WOULD ASSIST ME IN THIS TRANSFER, IT WOULD BE MOST PROFITABLE TO YOU.
I AM WORKING WITH MR. PHIL GRAM, LOBBYIST FOR UBS, WHO WILL BE MY REPLACEMENT AS MINISTRY OF THE TREASURY IN JANUARY. AS A SENATOR, YOU MAY KNOW HIM AS THE LEADER OF THE AMERICAN BANKING DEREGULATION MOVEMENT IN THE 1990S. THIS TRANSACTIN IS 100% SAFE.
THIS IS A MATTER OF GREAT URGENCY. WE NEED A BLANK CHECK. WE NEED THE FUNDS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WE CANNOT DIRECTLY TRANSFER THESE FUNDS IN THE NAMES OF OUR CLOSE FRIENDS BECAUSE WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER SURVEILLANCE. MY FAMILY LAWYER ADVISED ME THAT I SHOULD LOOK FOR A RELIABLE AND TRUSTWORTHY PERSON WHO WILL ACT AS A NEXT OF KIN SO THE FUNDS CAN BE TRANSFERRED.
PLEASE REPLY WITH ALL OF YOUR BANK ACCOUNT, IRA AND COLLEGE FUND ACCOUNT NUMBERS AND THOSE OF YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN TO WALLSTREETBAILOUT@TREASURY.GOV SO THAT WE MAY TRANSFER YOUR COMMISSION FOR THIS TRANSACTION. AFTER I RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION, I WILL RESPOND WITH DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT SAFEGUARDS THAT WILL BE USED TO PROTECT THE FUNDS.
YOURS FAITHFULLY MINISTER OF TREASURY PAULSON
Hat tip Brian, Angry Bear . . .
Tuesday, September 23, 2008 | 12:00 PM | Permalink
| Comments (75)
| TrackBack (1)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef010534c13b48970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP :
» Financial World Upside Down: Unpredictable Responses from Left and Right from The Buie Knife
BAILOUT HUMOR: Is the American government now equal to Nigerian Spammer/Scammers? Bailout Prevents Great Depression 2.0 (US NEWS): What would be the dollar cost of not bailing out Wall Street? Try a number north of $30 trillion.That's why Hank Paulson ... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 23, 2008 1:21:11 PM
Comments
Hilarious! :D
Posted by: Viv | Sep 23, 2008 12:15:47 PM
The lemmings in Congress bear some responsibility here, too.
They seem to feel no hesitation in extracting $700 B from us.
Posted by: DL | Sep 23, 2008 12:16:58 PM
Here's what we can do: go to Target or Amazon.com, order 1 pitchfork and 1 tiki torch, then overnight to Congress. Sure, we can blog, email, or fax, but imagine the impact of 1000 pitchforks and torches landing on the Capitol steps!
Roughly $50.00 in cost.
My .02 - JW
Posted by: JohnW | Sep 23, 2008 12:18:02 PM
Made my day.
Posted by: All Your Base Are Belong To Us | Sep 23, 2008 12:28:38 PM
Do I get to be king of Nigeria?
Posted by: Lionel | Sep 23, 2008 12:28:55 PM
Pretty good, but I posted a version at 10:30am this morning that I like a little better.
http://pbp.typepad.com/economy/2008/09/paulsons-bailout-letter.html
Posted by: Michael Donnelly | Sep 23, 2008 12:30:08 PM
I'm listening to Comrade Paulson testify before the Central Senate Banking Committee. The guy is babbling like an idiot. E.g., Question -- You've talked about reverse auctions, etc., as mechanisms of your plan, so please sketch out the big picture of what you're going to do. Answer -- This is very complicated. Reverse auctions are one part. We'll use different approaches for different securities. There are many kinds. They are all complicated. We'll bring in experts. We don't have much time. We need the money now.
That's just bullshit. We're about to give a trillion or more dollard to an idiot with absolutely no plan. Sounds a whole lot like this entire administration, quite frankly. I'd completely like to see Congress show some stones and say, "No!" Enough money for idiots.
The guys is asking for almost a trillion dollars and cannot explain his plan. I have low level employees who I would laugh out of my office if they gave me answers like that to support any proposal of theirs. Ridiculous. His plan -- I need the money, trust me, this will work. I call bullsh*t. Let's keep the trillion and use it for new works projects administration when the banks fail (and let their rich owners suffer, too).
Seriously pathetic. No plan. Just give me the money and I and my experts (to be gotten later) will take care of this.
Schumer asks him, "You've said you won't be using the whole 700 Billion up front. More like 50 Billion a month. How about we give you, 150 Billion now, and we review this in January." His answer, "I think that's a mistake. We need it now. Confidence. What if Congress is gone. Etc." I paraphrase.
And finally, I've heard him say a couple of time, "We're looking for real oversight." But the legislation plan asks for no oversight. No legal consequenses. It is crap.
I've lost a lot of faith in my government over the past decade. But this is really icing on the cake. Let the system fold, and those of us living in the system will pick up the pieces. At least that way, we can start caring for ourselves and our families instead of bailing out bankers.
Truly sickening. I'm just listening as I write. "We have experts who need to get working on this quickly." Why haven't his experts put together a detailed plan for Congress, instead of this blank check. He wants Congress to act now, on his blank, bold assurances, and he'll deal with the details later. Baloney. Total baloney.
Posted by: BostonJoe | Sep 23, 2008 12:33:47 PM
I have an idea. Let’s put Jim Rogers and Ron Paul in charge of doling out the money.
Then I would support the plan.
Posted by: DL | Sep 23, 2008 12:35:53 PM
Everything to the Bush Administration is urgent, whether it be Iraq, FISA, or the Patriot Act. That way they don't have to reveal what garbage they are selling. January can not come soon enough.
Posted by: JL | Sep 23, 2008 12:39:02 PM
How come Hank always wants to sell me whole life when all I really need is term insurance?
Posted by: Bruce in Tennessee | Sep 23, 2008 12:44:08 PM
BostonJoe: I couldn't agree more. I am listening to it and having the same reaction. This is unbelievable.
Posted by: Freddie | Sep 23, 2008 12:52:11 PM
@Bruce in Tenn: LOL!! Now THAT is hilarious. Your post just made my day.
So true. As I'm sure many have had happened to them, I had the same thing happen to me when my wife and I bought term a few years(after the guy weakly tried steering us to whole and some crappy annuity products with brutal fees).
Still laughing as I write this. Thanks for the humor.
Posted by: Jeff M. | Sep 23, 2008 12:54:49 PM
Damn, it is 11:50 and the marble landed on red again today....
For goodness sake...just let us have a severe recession (hopefully only) and get the damn thing over with....
Have we outlawed recessions yet? If I call recessions "shorts" can I get them outlawed?
Posted by: Bruce in Tennessee | Sep 23, 2008 12:55:25 PM
From a piece at Bloomberg:
'Bernanke, putting aside his prepared remarks released earlier today, said the Treasury should buy illiquid assets at "hold-to-maturity" values rather than at discounted "fire- sale" prices. The suspension of "mark-to-market" accounting for assets, a change backed by "many banks," would instead hurt investor confidence.'
http://tinyurl.com/3f2drd
Anyone know where I could buy a working guillotine and a couple of tumbrels?
Posted by: Robespierre (aka Joshua) | Sep 23, 2008 12:58:03 PM
Bruce,
Quit making sense. I'm from Alabama and we down here take it as a personal affront when Tennesseans act smart and reasonable.
If you don't like whole life, I've got a reverse-auction security you might be interested in...
Posted by: Donkei | Sep 23, 2008 1:01:36 PM
They should call this plan by its real name:
< < THE FUND TO HELP ELECT REPUBLICANS IN NOVEMBER >>
Posted by: DL | Sep 23, 2008 1:02:58 PM
> How come Hank always wants to sell me whole life when all I really need is term insurance?
That's awesome. Thanks for the laugh.
Posted by: pmorrisonfl | Sep 23, 2008 1:05:23 PM
Why am I reminded of Colin Powell's testimony to the U.N. with regard to WMDs when watching these clowns speak?
Posted by: Blackhalo | Sep 23, 2008 1:07:36 PM
Cramer has alternated between praising Paulson and calling him bush-league, depending of course on whether the market is going up or down respectively. Cramer is currently in full support of "the plan". If and when it fails to stop the pain, you can bet that Cramer will distance himself once again with another venomous burst of name calling.
Posted by: Eric | Sep 23, 2008 1:07:43 PM
Donkei,
Uh, we have a football coach we'll trade you for some distressed debt.....
My undergraduate studies were at Mississippi State, so it seems wherever I live we are in a football recession.
Posted by: Bruce in Tennessee | Sep 23, 2008 1:09:17 PM
Where are the shorts to cover this dip? Oh wait, nevermind......
Posted by: Jeff M. | Sep 23, 2008 1:11:37 PM
I've been reading this blog for over a year and the discussion here has been "right on" as this situation has unfolded.
I am most definitely a "josephine 6 pack". I don't have the economic background or knowledge that all of you who post here possess.
Here is my naivete showing through in this thought?
If as Bernanke and Paulson are arguing today in front of the Senate Banking Committee (re: how taxpayers are affected);
...without this 700B bailout plan, the "farmers won't be able to get loans...business won't be able to get loans...homeowners, etc.
Why can't the Government be the Lender of Last resort to the taxpayer as well with the 700B? Why can't some/all of the banks be bypassed during this crisis? If business/farmers can borrow from this 700B fund and pay interest back into it, won't that limit the credit crisis to just the banks? Let the weak fail, and the strong survive?
Is there more going on "behind the scenes?"
Once again, please be patient with my naivete, but I really am learning alot by reading this blog, and I would appreciate any info given.
Posted by: raebae | Sep 23, 2008 1:14:29 PM
Does anyone know how I can sign up to sell securities/troubled assets to the Treasury Department? I would like to sell them my house at the price I initially paid. Then the Treasury could hold it until the price appreciates back to that amount. Taxpayers have no risk.
Posted by: Don | Sep 23, 2008 1:15:37 PM
My only wish out of this mess is that Dennis Kneale is somehow fired by CNBC. Words cannot describe just how much I loathe this corporate sycophant and hack.
Michelle Cabrera Caruso (whatever the fuck her name is) is a close second.
Posted by: Jeff M. | Sep 23, 2008 1:15:55 PM
Has someone noticed the language creep in the bailout proposals?
The original Paulson proposal was for "bying mortgage related assets" with "The term “mortgage-related assets” means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, .."
This has now morphed into "purchase troubled assets" with "The term ‘‘troubled assets’’ means—
... any other financial instrument, as the Secretary determines necessary to promote financial market stability."
This has little to do with mortgages.
With this the Treasury can buy gold, futures, yen interest swaps, derivatives ... whatever.
The Treasury Morphs Into A Hedgefund
Posted by: b | Sep 23, 2008 1:15:59 PM
