This is a confidential message from the Microsoft/Yahoo Office, You have been approved by the Microsoft/Yahoo Foundation Payment Board to receive a cash grant of $552,000.00 Dollars E-mail us on: esq.wilson.harlings@live.com<mailto:esq.wilson.harlings@live.com>
contact Secertary- Mr. Wilson Harlings on this email: esq.wilson.harlings@live.com<mailto:esq.wilson.harlings@live.com>
Provide him With
1. Full Name:
2. Address:
3. Tel/Mobile:
4. Occupation:
5. Date of Birth:
6. Payment number: G-900-94
Note: All response and Queries concerning your claims should be sent via email to :(esq.wilson.harlings@live.com<mailto:esq.wilson.harlings@live.com>)
Grant Steven - Announcer
Bummer, I thought I was the only one who got this e-mail.
ReplyDeleteI got one also. Today but the announcer is Stumbaugh Katy
ReplyDeleteI just recieved one today is this real???????
ReplyDeleteI just received the same e-mail in St.Petersburg,FL. The e-mail address shows "GST ROCES.UK." which seems to be a developer of lesson lans for teachers.
ReplyDeleteI just found info on this on a "SPAM E-mail info Site" it IS a Scam. NO you can't get the $. lol sorry, I was hopfull for free $ too.
ReplyDeleteMy husband's really disappointed this is not for real - I received this to-day in Vancouver BC Canada
ReplyDeleteI too got this message today:
ReplyDeleteFrom: Fabian H.
Sent: Tue 2/14/2012 6:59 AM
To: Fabian H.
Subject: Payment number: G-900-94
This is a confidential message from the Microsoft/Yahoo Office, You have been approved by the Microsoft/Yahoo Foundation Payment Board to receive a cash grant of $1,750,000 Dollars E-mail us on: hwilson.esq@mynet.com
contact Secertary- Mr. Wilson Harlings on this email: hwilson.esq@mynet.com
Provide him With
1. Full Name:
2. Address:
3. Tel/Mobile:
4. Occupation:
5. Date of Birth:
6. Payment number: G-900-94
Note: All response and Queries concerning your claims should be sent via email to :(hwilson.esq@mynet.com)
Jan Devlieger - Announcer
ReplyDeleteUnder this obsolete law, insurers must hit $100 million (with an "m") in losses in a year after a terror attack, and the government picks up most of the rest, up to $100 billion (with a "b"). The law is scheduled to lapse next year. Congress should let it.
We've always been skeptical about the need for taxpayers to be the insurers of last resort here. Why not let the insurance industry operate as it does in preparing for other catastrophic events: Create and price insurance options for coverage, and offer it to people who need [url=http://www.agoshow.net/Florida-Marlins-2-Hanley-Ramirez-blue-2010-All-Star-Jerseys-74/]Florida Marlins 2 Hanley Ramirez blue 2010 All Star Jerseys[/url] it without undue government interference or taxpayer liability.
But the insurance industry and some of its allies in Congress have seized on the Boston Marathon bombing to argue that terror insurance cannot be allowed to lapse. In recent days, Republican U.S. Rep. Michael Grimm of New York introduced a bill with his Democratic colleague from New York, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, to renew the law for five [url=http://www.agoshow.net/Dodgers-16-Ethier-Blue-2010-All-Star-Jerseys-39/]Dodgers 16 Ethier Blue 2010 All Star Jerseys[/url] years.
The Marathon bombing is a "a wake-up call to members of Congress that terrorism is still alive," Robert Rusbuldt, president of the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America, told Politico.
No argument there. But the Boston attack, while devastating and horrific, is [url=http://www.agoshow.net/Tigers-24-Miguel-Cabrera-Home-Cool-Base-White-2010-All-Star-Jerseys-91/]Tigers 24 Miguel Cabrera Home Cool Base White 2010 All Star Jerseys[/url] not an argument to renew this law. It's [url=http://www.agoshow.net/Blank-Black-2011-All-Star-Jerseys-96/]Blank Black 2011 All Star Jerseys[/url] still early, but we haven't heard claims that insurers can't handle the financial fallout without government help.
Let's remember that before Sept. 11, terror coverage generally was included in property/casualty insurance at no extra cost because the likelihood of such attacks seemed remote. The Boston Marathon bombings and dozens of thwarted terror plots since 9/11 remind us that, sadly, terror insurance is still necessary. It's a cost of doing business today for some industries. It needs to be factored into everyday business decisions about insurance coverage, without federal taxpayers hovering nearby.
Even with the government backstop in place, and even though availability and affordability of insurance has improved, many businesses still say no, thanks. One large insurance broker, Marsh, Inc., reported in 2011 [url=http://www.agoshow.net/Yankees-2-Derek-Jeter-White-2010-All-Star-Jerseys-55/]Yankees 2 Derek Jeter White 2010 All Star Jerseys[/url] that 65 percent of its customers paid for terror policies, according to that 2012 CRS report. That number rose swiftly after 2003 but has leveled off in recent years, the report said.
That's the way a market works: Companies make decisions about insurance based on whether the perceived risk is worth the cost of coverage.
The upshot: If the law lapses, the insurance industry will still find many willing customers. It will also figure out how to price the ongoing risk of terror attacks without a government safety net.
We have confidence that insurers can do that. This market can be as resilient and resourceful as the people of Boston. Let's give it a chance.
[url=http://www.mzzaj.com/vb/member.php?u=13]more[/url]