4est_4est_Gump
Run Forrest! RUN!
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Posts
- 89,007
Stockton’s Racket — And Ours
Kevin D. Williamson, NRO
April 3, 2013
Kevin D. Williamson, NRO
April 3, 2013
Words of wisdom from an investment adviser: When it comes to municipal bonds, the ones you want you can’t get, and the ones you can get you don’t want.
Assured Guaranty and other large holders of bonds issued by the city of Stockton, Calif., got a sharp reminder of that on Monday when a federal judge ruled that the city was entitled to file bankruptcy under federal law to gain protection from bondholders and other creditors. The bondholders’ suit was probably never going to stand up: The city is plainly insolvent. Faced with a choice between screwing its bondholders and reneging on the pension benefits it owes to union goons, Stockton’s leaders clearly calculated that at this point they have little to lose by shortchanging bondholders — its credit rating is already so low that it’d have a hard time financing a used Hyundai with $5,000 down — and that while creditors may sue, complain, and caterwaul, they do not get to vote. Moody’s responded by downgrading the credit on the pension-obligation bonds of nearby Solano County.
Pension-obligation bonds fall under a special class of idiocy. Municipalities with large unfunded liabilities for employee pensions wipe those obligations off the books by selling municipal bonds, investing the proceeds in stocks or other investments in hopes of earning a spread that will make the whole thing work out for them. Noted bond speculator Jon Corzine once called the maneuver “the dumbest idea I ever heard.” Make a note: Too stupid for Jon Corzine is a rarified kind of stupid.
...
Some investment professionals have suggested to me that bondholders are fools for entrusting their money to the likes of Stockton and San Bernardino. I agree. But the bondholders at least had a choice in the matter. If they’re fools, what does that make taxpayers?