With the instructive Detroit
precedent, shrunken populations, and underfunded municipal pensions
common, we can conclude that no city, not even Chicago, should be
thought of as too big to fail.
About the bonds of Detroit, Barron’s said: “A lot of investors bought this debt because they assumed that the state of Michigan wouldn’t let its largest city default.”1
In other words, they assumed Detroit was “too big to fail.”
Nonetheless, Detroit did default and became the largest municipal
bankruptcy in history. This bankruptcy, with unfunded municipal employee
pensions among the competing creditors, is a hugely important
precedent. Is any city too big to fail?
Essential to understanding the record bankruptcy of “Detroit”
is that it applies only to a small part of metropolitan Detroit. The
bankrupt City of Detroit has only 17 percent of the population of the
metropolitan area. Of the two Detroits, Smaller Detroit is broke, but Bigger Detroit, which is five times as big, isn’t.
Of course, Smaller Detroit used to be a lot bigger. “Coming out of World War II,” the Detroit Free Press
reflected, “American industry was triumphant, and few centers of
industry were riding higher than Detroit … Detroit exercised an outsized
influence on the state’s politics and economy.”2
What is now Smaller Detroit, once a boom town, had its population peak
in 1950 at 1.85 million. (On a personal note, in 1950 I was in the
second grade in the Detroit public schools.) Since then, the city has
lost 61 percent of its population, which at 714,000 is less than it was
in 1920.
At its peak, the City of Detroit’s population represented 71 percent of the
metropolitan area, now it is 17 percent; it was 29 percent of the State
of Michigan, now it is 7 percent. Detroit is the largest city as a
proportion of the state to go bankrupt. Its shrinkage made it
politically easier to let it fail, as well as economically more likely
that it would.
These striking trends are shown in the following 100-year population graph.

Source: U.S. Census data.
This basic demographic pattern is shared by many old
manufacturing cities in the northeast United States. These include St.
Louis, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Chicago,
Philadelphia, Boston, and Milwaukee —
listed in the order of percent population loss since their peak, which
like Detroit was in 1950 for all of them except Milwaukee (which was in
1960). All have lost a large proportion of their population, ranging
from 63 percent to 20 percent; all are significantly smaller than the
rest of their respective metropolitan populations; and all have become
much smaller proportions of their respective states.
The following table summarizes these changes.
The following table summarizes these changes.

The bond ratings of the City of Detroit by Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s were below-investment grade or “junk” BB/Ba-3 ratings by 2009. That year, the city’s chief financial officer met with Wall Street analysts to discuss its mounting financial problems. “What happens if Detroit goes bankrupt?” he was asked. His reply: “We don’t. The state will step in and ensure that they right the ship and that the bonds are paid.”3 It didn’t. The bonds weren’t. Instead the state sensibly insisted that the city declare municipal bankruptcy and give the creditors some serious haircuts. Michigan’s largest city was decisively not too big to fail. Which is as it should be. Should investors assume that any city is too big to fail? Nope.
No comments:
Post a Comment