There’s no comparison between retirees — many of whom live in the city and are familiar with its troubles — and the bankers who lent an insolvent city money, enabling and hastening its decline.
So it’s “the bankers” who are responsible for Detroit’s plight. Imagine for a moment if the evil bankers had refused to lend Detroit any money. They would have been excoriated in the Detroit Free Press, charged with “redlining,” and blamed for Detroit’s financial problems for their very refusal to help.
Unbelievable as it is in its utter shamelessness, if we assume for a moment that it is evil to lend money to an insolvent city, then all Detroit bondholders (not just bankers) become immoral, right? Never the issuer of the bonds. Why is it that government is not seen as the greater culprit by far?
According to the same logic wouldn’t it be immoral to give any more money to Detroit, ever?
Well, yeah. Along with just about every Democrat-controlled urban area in America.
Which is why this argument isn’t likely to get much traction. It blasts using Other People’s Money to finance debt-ridden Democrat strongholds when, in fact, the very heart of the Democrat project is spending Other People’s Money.