Monday, December 22, 2008

SantaCorp pleads for Bailout

CEO Kringle: Polar Toy Giant "On Brink"

WASHINGTON - Flanked by officials from the United Elf Toytinkerers union, SantaCorp CEO Kris Kringle today told the House Ways and Means Committee that without immediate government financial help, his firm would be forced to declare bankruptcy, lay off thousands of elves and reindeer, and potentially cancel its annual worldwide Christmas Eve toy delivery.
"These are grim economic times for everyone, but even more so for non-profit toy manufacturers in the Snow Belt," said Kringle. "Our accountants have indicated that we are on track to exhaust our reserves of cash and magical pixie fairydust by December 23. Oh deary me."

Hat tip: Iowahawk

10 comments:

Lucy said...

He he he. Love it!

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Fairfacts, would you prefer the feds let the big three go broke and transfer over $100 bil retirement benefirs liabilities to the taxpayer?

Oswald Bastable said...

Let them eat Reindeer...

Anonymous said...

Adolf - fuck no.

they should go backrupt, and the $100 bil retirees shoud go into the gutter

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Anonymous, you and a few dozen like you are the primary reason I am unlikely ever to join ACT. You are probably too dim witted to realise that in the event of a collapse, the Feds are obliged by law to pick up the tab, a far far bigger tab than some concessional interest on a piddly $30 bil loan.

James said...

Adolf.....confused socialist thinkers like you are not wanted in the ACT party so everyones happy.

Just how is storing up even bigger problems by bailing out losers with taxpayers money going to stop this sort of thing happening....do tell.

Clunking Fist said...

I would prefer that the companies go bust, someone buys them up cheap, employs a lot of the same workers on new contracts and then starts making the same tat, but cheaper.

Ruth said...

That's what happens in an ideal world Clunking Fist.

It is relatively easy for govt to exit the bailout with the shareholder stakes taken.

'Bailouts' may not be ideologically pure, but they are not the Apocalyptic Disaster those on the far right claim, either. As Bush said, govt may make money out of it in the long run.

Expensive patches are being slapped on the tyres of the economy and it is being pushed back on the road...something most reasonable people accept has to be done.

ISeeRed said...

Adolf, Anonymous speaks for himself, not ACT, thank you. But let's run with your "logic": assuming you support Labour, if I found a dozen Marxists who wanted to emulate Pol Pot's policies, would that stop you from voting Labour? Yes, Germany has a few neo-Nazis, so why don't you run over and back over the next German backpacker you see until they resemble a meat lover's pizza? It's the same "guilt by non-association" logic.

I'm so sick of black-and-white "us good, them bad" political thinking, if you can call it that.

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

Adolf, I am still making my mind up.
There was a good case for some banking bailouts, as a patch-up is better than a collapse.
Certainly bailout the mainstream High Street banks, but not dodgy or risky financial institituions who offered extra high interest.
But where do you draw the line?
We have UK car companies seeking bailouts too.
Perhaps the likes of Jaguar might have a case as they have suffered from recent annual car tax hikes on larger vehicles.
But what makes car firms special.
Surely every business will want and expect a bailout.
It does seem a no win situation.
A dilemma for whoever is in power.
Damed if you do, damned if you dopn't.