"Back when I was a rookie reporter at the Detroit Free Press nearly 30 years ago, the big debate the staff had over lunches was which would go bankrupt first: the big automakers or the city. And which experience would be worse.
You could make arguments for each possibility, but most of
the staffers thought there was no way either event would ever actually happen.
They insisted that the early signs of trouble were an anomaly or something that
could be reversed before it became a calamity.
Having just earned my degree in economics, I thought back
then that both were possible — many years in the future — and that bankruptcies
for the Big Three would be bad for the city, but that a bankruptcy for the city
would be bad for the entire country.
Sadly, what was once little more than a theory is now a
reality, but what’s worse is that so many people — like my old colleagues —
don’t recognize what the city’s financial woes mean on a national level.
Detroit owes roughly $20 billion to over 100,000
creditors, but the big creditors people will be watching are the city’s
public-sector labor unions, which fear that a bankruptcy judge might let the
city reduce or cancel pensions and retiree health benefits. . . .
That’s why the Detroit bankruptcy filing serves as a
warning beacon for everyone expecting a pension and other benefits when they
retire, a signal that it’s dangerous to entrust your financial future to others,
assuming they are going to keep their promises.
How much precedent Detroit will set for other communities
remains to be seen, but clearly everyone is watching to see what’ll be allowed.
Other communities on the brink will see how the Motor City comes through the
experience financially and decide if they want to mark a similar course on the
map, even if it is as a last resort. . . .
The Pew Center for the States estimates that public
pension plans nationwide were underfunded by $1.4 trillion in 2010. While the
stock market has reached record highs — narrowing the gap somewhat — since then,
the undeniable problem is that most state and local government pension funds
don’t have enough money to live up to the promises they have made. . . .
Even if the Detroit situation is resolved without setting
some benchmark for other troubled municipalities to use and follow, the nation’s
pension shortfalls aren’t going away; this story is going to play out again and
again, and while it will be corporations, cities and towns in the headlines, it
will be the nameless, faceless individuals who are the real story.
That’s not a story anyone wants playing out in their own
home.
Now, back to the bankruptcy filings of the big automakers
for a moment. They were big stories for Detroit, but they actually showed the
underlying values of the businesses; allowed a break and a chance to
restructure, they were able to improve their fortunes and move forward. Talk to
auto-industry analysts and some of them are more bullish on the prospects of the
domestic manufacturers than they have been in decades.
The problem for the city of Detroit, by comparison, is that there is no reason to believe it comes through a bankruptcy with greatly improved prospects. The court process will be more a respite than a solution; the city will still have the same high unemployment, dwindling work force and Rust Belt economics, with the same delinquent tax revenue collections and other conditions that make it hard to see any ability to improve the long-term numbers without reducing pensions or eliminating benefits. . . .
Even during those conversations at the Free Press in the
1980s, colleagues who had seen the city and the automakers take care of
generations of workers wondered if my worries about future bankruptcy meant that
workers should not trust their pensions.
“Oh, they will get pension payments,” I said, “but maybe
not of the size they expect, so the more they save now — rather than living as
if they’re set and taken care of because that’s what the company or union says —
the more secure they will be.”
That advice holds for anyone with a pension today: Take
full responsibility for your future savings, or supplement the benefits you are
earning now, just in case.
Anything less than that, and you have underfunded your
future.
Companies and communities can get away with underfunding
their futures, to some extent.... .
Individuals don’t have the same luxury.
If you don’t save enough — and if your pension benefits
are cut because of the recklessness of your past employers — no one is going to
bail you out. That’s what investors need to think about every time they hear
about how Detroit’s bankruptcy is proceeding; trouble is going to show up, even
if it takes a few decades to hit your home. Instead of crossing your fingers and
hoping that you won’t be effected, make a plan."
Summing Up
As always, hope is not a good strategy.
Neither is looking the other way and acting as if all your potential or real problems will solve themselves.
Nor is dependence on the government, including a belief that the politicians can create money without first tapping the citizenry for the funds.
Thus, self-reliance is the best form of insurance for individuals.
Next best is having the confidence that our fellow man will do the right thing and help us when we need help.
That's not the government knows best gang of self-serving elitists. And it never will be.
That's my take.
Thanks. Bob.
As always, hope is not a good strategy.
Neither is looking the other way and acting as if all your potential or real problems will solve themselves.
Nor is dependence on the government, including a belief that the politicians can create money without first tapping the citizenry for the funds.
Thus, self-reliance is the best form of insurance for individuals.
Next best is having the confidence that our fellow man will do the right thing and help us when we need help.
That's not the government knows best gang of self-serving elitists. And it never will be.
That's my take.
Thanks. Bob.
No comments:
Post a Comment