????這就是底特律的現(xiàn)實，而且現(xiàn)在它終于開始正視這個問題了。底特律希望債券持有人能給它的應付賬款“剃剃頭”，打個折，但這可能是個錯誤的做法。一旦開了這個先例，它以后可能會給自己、甚至連密歇根州政府都帶來額外的借貸成本。底特律之所以要借這筆債就是用來付養(yǎng)老金的，所以它首先要下手“剃頭”的對象也應該是養(yǎng)老金。

????但是在這種關(guān)鍵的時候，工會并沒有與市政府站在一條戰(zhàn)線上，而是通過打官司迫使政府全額發(fā)放他們的福利。底特律破產(chǎn)之后，工會就沒有辦法再打官司了，只能坐下來與市政府達成某種協(xié)議。這是件好事——問題終于不用繼續(xù)再拖下去了。但是最壞的情況就是市政府做出某種妥協(xié)，仍然保持該市的高稅率和低服務水平。而如果底特律不變成一個讓人們愿意在這里工作和生活的城市，它的人口、就業(yè)崗位和財政收入還會繼續(xù)流失。因此，底特律市政府應該“硬起來”，對養(yǎng)老金領取者們強硬表態(tài)：如果他們不與政府達成某種協(xié)議，讓城市重新恢復造血功能，那么就讓他們喝密歇根湖的西北風好了。

????工會對這種情況怕得要命，而且他們也應該感到害怕。美國法律規(guī)定，私人企業(yè)取消了養(yǎng)老金后，由美國政府建立的養(yǎng)老金待遇擔保公司（PBGC）就要代付工人損失的一半福利。但如果涉及政府機構(gòu)公務員的養(yǎng)老金的話，情況就不同了。也就是說，如果底特律市政府成功地砍掉了它的養(yǎng)老金，那么作為政府公務人員，理論上就連一分錢的退休金也拿不到了。這恰恰就是底特律應該打的一張牌，而且可能也是它不得不打的一張牌——因為即使底特律所有的債券持有人一夜之間都消失了，同時它把所有的政府員工都撒手丟給奧巴馬的醫(yī)改養(yǎng)老政策，底特律的財政也仍將是一片赤字。

????美國的各大城市和工會都在緊盯著底特律的破產(chǎn)保護案，因為他們在養(yǎng)老金和福利開支上也面臨著類似的問題。在工會擁有強大影響力的某些前工業(yè)城鎮(zhèn)，比如芝加哥和費城，現(xiàn)在也開始削減城市服務開支了。他們正在重蹈底特律多年前的覆轍。比如芝加哥本月裁掉了2,000名左右的教師，目的就是設法支付新增的4億美元的養(yǎng)老金成本。

????不過，在財政收入與福利成本的規(guī)模上，還沒有一個大型城市達到底特律這種難以為繼的程度。目前，底特律每收入1美元，就要花43美分用于福利成本，而其他大城市最多把其中的20美分用于福利成本。盡管其他大城市近期可能不會發(fā)生債務違約，但這并不意味著未來5到10年內(nèi)也不會發(fā)生債務違約。比如芝加哥的養(yǎng)老金成本到2015年就會猛增到現(xiàn)在的3倍。

????對于芝加哥以及芝加哥市長拉姆?伊曼紐爾來說，目前最不可取的決策，就是重蹈底特律的覆轍，繼續(xù)提高稅率，削減服務水平，逼人們逃離芝加哥?，F(xiàn)在就是應該與公務員進行談判的時候了，底特律的破產(chǎn)給這些城市指了一條明路，告訴他們應該如何與退休或尚未退休的市政人員達成某種妥協(xié)。同時，工會在看到這出破產(chǎn)悲劇后，可能也更愿意坐下來與政府談判。因為損失一部分福利畢竟要好于徹底失去所有福利。

????底特律陷入麻煩已經(jīng)很多年了，但是上周它終于舉起了白旗。雖然有人把底特律的破產(chǎn)與其他某些城市進行了比較，但事實是底特律的問題要嚴重得多。底特律的破產(chǎn)并不是一件壞事，而是給城市注入了新的動力，使工會不得不聽政府講道理，與政府坐下來達成某種妥協(xié)，避免城市因為經(jīng)濟和政治錯誤滑向更深的深淵。這樣一來，底特律的領導們和工會起碼還能確保這座城市還有支付一部分福利的能力——盡管它支付的金額可能低于曾經(jīng)的承諾。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：樸成奎

????This is Detroit's reality, and it is now facing the issue head on. It wants its bondholders to take a haircut on what they are owed, but that would be a mistake. By setting that precedent, the city would potentially raise borrowing costs for both itself and the state of Michigan for years to come. Since Detroit took out that debt to pay its pensioners, that is where it needs to start cutting first.

????But instead of working with the city, the unions have fought it by suing to keep their benefits at 100%. Bankruptcy takes away their ability to sue and forces them to work with the city to hammer out some sort of deal. This is a good thing -- time for delaying the situation is over. But the worst thing the city can do is to strike a compromise that still keeps the city's tax rates high and its services low. It will continue to lose people, jobs, and revenue if it doesn't make the city a nice place where people want to live and work. As such, Detroit should play hardball and threaten to flush its pensioners into Lake Michigan unless they take a deal that allows the city to get back up on its feet.

????The unions are scared beyond belief, and, frankly, they should be. When private businesses cancel their pensions, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) steps in and pledges to pay beneficiaries half of lost benefits. That is not the case with pensions connected to a government entity, which means that if Detroit is successful in canceling its pensions, then its former workers could theoretically lose everything. This is the card that Detroit should play -- and it just might have to -- because even if it wipes out its bondholders and throws its workforce on Obamacare it would still be in the red.

????Cities and unions across the nation are watching the Detroit case as they are facing similar issues regarding pension and legacy costs. Large, former industrial towns with powerful unions, like Chicago and Philadelphia, now have to make the painful cuts to city services that Detroit made years ago. Chicago, for instance, laid off some 2,000 teachers this month to cover a $400 million increase in pension costs.

????To be sure, no other major city is as far gone as Detroit when comparing revenue to legacy costs. Presently, Detroit spends around 43 cents of every dollar it takes in to service its legacy costs. Other large cities pay no more than 20 cents on the dollar. But while a default of another major city isn't imminent, that doesn't mean that it couldn't happen five or 10 years down the road. Chicago, for instance, will see its pension costs triple by 2015.

????The worst thing for Chicago and its mayor, Rahm Emanuel, to do is repeat Detroit's mistake and continue to raise taxes and cut services to levels that make people flee to the suburbs. The time for negotiation is now, and Detroit's bankruptcy gives these cities a blueprint to work off to achieve some sort of compromise with its former and current city workers. At the same time, unions watching the drama play out in Detroit will be more apt to sit down and negotiate. Taking a moderate cut in benefits now is much better than losing them all together.

????Detroit has been in trouble for years, but last week it finally waved the white flag. While some are comparing Detroit's bankruptcy with that of the other muni bankruptcies of late, the truth is Detroit has much bigger problems. Far from being a bad thing, Detroit's bankruptcy actually empowers the city so it can force its unions to listen to reason and work out some sort of compromise to prevent the city from slipping further into economic and political irrelevance. In doing so, Detroit's leaders and its unions will be ensuring that there is actually will be a city left that can pay something -- even if it is less than what it had promised in the past.