如果美國地方政府大量破產

我老是覺得，經營一個社區甚至是一個國家，這樣的公共部門，和經營一家企業，在很多方面具有相似性：你都得先生存下來，再才有能力和資格來談論更好的生活。

而任何經營活動，都有固定成本和可變成本之分。不同的是，有的經營活動需要巨大的固定成本，被稱為資本密集型投資。而有的則相對比較靈活，需要的固定成本比較低。

當然，目的不同，是私營企業和公共產品供給部門最大的區別。前者強調的是可見和可預見的利潤，而後者強調的是分享，和在分享之下大家能夠獲得的未來最大得益。而這個得益，很可能是通過看不見摸不着的方式在進行着的。

就像是國家花大價錢來開發交通，便利了大家的出行和物流，雖然作為開發者自己，在短期和長期，如果“就事論事”的話，不可能獲得經濟上的任何好處（虧損是結果），但是，畢竟這樣的供給能夠帶來整體的經濟繁榮，就此就可以提高整個國家的生活水準，甚至是國家的財政收入，從算大帳來看，虧損的生意可能還是賺了的投資。

雖然如此，這裡還是有幾個非常重要的前提假設不得不關注：雖然是好，但你先得有資金搞這樣的投資，至少，你得有辦法獲得貸款來搞這樣的投資；如果你通過貸款來搞投資，你這樣的投資在未來得有能力，通過提高經濟效率來獲得足夠的財政收入，並且就此用這些收入來還清貸款（也就是說，在你經濟繁榮之後你有能力增加稅收來撈到錢還貸款）。

這兩個假設，不論在中國，還是在美國，在金融危機之後，似乎是都遇到了死結：中國的地方政府超支過度問題已經非常的嚴重，大量的地方政府破產，看來也只是時間的問題。在美國，問題則是已經火燒眉毛，很多地方政府已經沒有能力支付維持費用，來確保自己已經習慣了的生活水準了。

不談中國的事，就看美國的國情。

在美國，如果經濟狀況繼續的無法獲得明顯的改善，甚至是繼續變的惡化，那麼，維持現在的生活水準的難度就會變得越來越大。繼續下去，就是持續的入不敷出，就是持續的無法滿足維持現有生活水準所需的固定成本的開支。久而久之，就是一個個地方政府的破產。而為了避免這樣的破產出現，唯一有的選擇就是降低自己的生活水準，而按照美國人的生活習慣，按照經濟學家觀察到的美國消費者的“消費水準具有慣性”的事實，主動下降習慣了的生活水準，很可能不是可以考慮的選擇。

那麼，接下來，就是像希臘那樣，想盡辦法，靠坑蒙拐騙，借錢來維持生活水準。

就此繼續下去，提供借款的中國會跟着吃虧，借錢花掉了的美國佬，則在瀟灑了幾代人之後，不知道該繼續怎麼樣將日子過下去了。

繼續的思考，你讀讀下面這篇舊聞，自己看看和想想吧。

Eight States Slashing Local Funding

June 20, 2012 by 247wallst

Funding from local governments’ two biggest sources — state aid and property taxes — fell for the first time since 1980, according to a report released last week by the Pew American Cities Project. The decrease in funding from these two sources has forced many local areas to cut expenses significantly. Relying on the Pew report, 24/7 Wall St. identified eight states slashing local funding to cities, towns, counties and school districts.

24/7 Wall St.’s independent analysis of data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the U.S. Census Bureau indicates states that cut funding the most had budgets that were particularly hard hit during this period. Some suffered budget shortfalls that forced them to cut spending. Others experienced drops in tax revenue that prompted the same response.

Of the eight states with the highest cuts in local funding, four experienced among the steepest declines in tax revenue. Wyoming, which had the worst decline in tax revenue, fell a whopping 21.9% during the period.

Budget shortfalls were among the worst in many of these states. Arizona, California and Nevada, among the eight states cutting local budgets, had the first, second and third highest budget shortfalls as a percentage of their general fund. Arizona faced a 65% shortfall in 2010.

These budget shortfalls, according to Robert Zahradnik, research director for the Pew American Cities Project, forced states to make deep budget cuts, hitting local governments — and their employees — particularly hard. According to the report, the number of employees on local government payrolls fell in 45 states between 2008 and 2011.

In several of the states with the largest cuts to local governments, these declines were the most pronounced. California, Arizona and Nevada were among the 10 states with the largest drops in government employees per person. In Nevada, the number of government employees fell by 15.4%, the most in the country.

While police and fire departments and other areas of local budgets were hit hard as well, no area suffered more than school districts. Zahradnik explained, “about half of the reduction of the local government jobs were in the education sector, and that’s not entirely surprising because that’s where the staff and the money are for the local government.” This is a notable departure from standard practice during a downturn in the economy. Usually, Zahradnik noted, local governments will leave education off the table because it is something the public wants to protect. In the great recession, however, there simply were no other options.

24/7 Wall St. identified the eight states with a 5% or greater decrease in state aid to cities, towns, counties, and school districts between 2009 and 2010 based on state funding to regional governments and government employee data from the Pew American Cities Project report, “The Local Squeeze: Falling Revenues and Growing Demand for Services Challenge Cities, Counties, and School Districts.” The report relies on the latest available Census Bureau information on state budgets. It also calculated the change in government workers between December 2008 and December 2011 using Bureau of Labor Statistics data on government employee figures, as well as population estimates, also from the Census Bureau. Separately, 24/7 Wall St. obtained state budget shortfall data from the Center for Budget Policies and Priorities, as well as changes in tax revenue between 2009 and 2010 from the Census Bureau.

These are the eight states slashing local funding the most.

8) Nevada
> Pct. decline in local funding: 5.5%
> Actual decline local funding: $215 million (16th largest) 
> State budget shortfall (2010): 46.8% (3rd largest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -15.4% (the largest decline)

According to Pew, between December 2008 and December 2011, Nevada municipalities shed 15.4% of their combined workforce. This was the largest per-resident decline in local government employees in the entire country. In 2010, state budget plans included provisions for about $200 million in cuts to the state’s K-12 education system. The state’s fiscal policies affected municipalities severely. Teachers in Las Vegas had to agree to a one-year salary freeze in 2010 while the city of Reno planned to eliminate 94 teaching positions. North Las Vegas planned to cut 33 firefighting jobs and 93 positions at the police department in order to present the state with a balanced budget in 2010.

7) Arizona
> Pct. decline in local funding: 5.9%
> Actual decline local funding: $574 million (8th largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 65% (the largest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -7.7% (4th largest decline)

Between 2009 and 2010, the state of Arizona cut funding to localities by 5.9% while total tax revenue fell by 8.5%, according to the latest Census state government finance data. With the largest budget shortfall in the country, austerity measures have had far-reaching, negative consequences on the lives of Arizona citizens, from cuts in education to cuts in health care for the impoverished. Arizona schools, such as the Mesa Unified School District, have faced serious fiscal budget cuts since 2010, which have led to half-days for kindergarteners, decreased school maintenance and reduced computer purchasing funds.

6) California
> Pct. decline in local funding: 5.9%
> Actual decline local funding: $5.7 billion (the largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 52.8% (2nd largest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -7.4% (8th largest decline)

California’s extreme budget shortfall, which equaled 36.7% of the general fund in 2009 and 52.8% in 2010, led the state to cut local funding by $5.7 billion. For the city of Stockton, for example, this meant a 30% decrease, from 2006 to 2010, in sales tax revenue allocated from the state. This puts the city at risk of defaulting on its debt. If it does, it will join just 54 other debt-issuing municipalities in the United States — of the more than 15,000 municipalities rated by Moody’s Investor Service — that defaulted from 1970 to 2007. Also impacted by state cuts is the city of Los Angeles, which had more than 2,000 teachers working in the city’s schools lose their jobs prior to the 2009 – 2010 school year.

5) Texas
> Pct. decline in local funding: 7.4%
> Actual decline local funding: $2.2 billion (2nd largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 10.7% (6th smallest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -4.7% (tied at 22nd largest decline)

Texas had the second-largest decrease in state funding to municipalities in the U.S., nearly $2.2 billion. Those who bore the greatest brunt of these cuts were the students enrolled in the Texas Public School system — districts cut bus services, supplies and the number of teachers in Texas, a state where a fifth of those under 18 are from impoverished households. The Pasadena Independent School District, whose budget was cut by $350 million in 2011, is one of 300 school districts to pursue litigation against Texas for the $4.3 billion cut in funding.

4) Minnesota
> Pct. decline in local funding: 8.2%
> Actual decline local funding: $928 million (5th largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 22.7% (21st smallest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -3.8% (24th smallest decline)

According to the Minnesota Budget Project, the inability of the state to pay down its deficit in the 2010 – 2011 bienniums was caused by a heavy reliance on one-time measures that failed to correct or reduce long-run deficits. In 2011, the League of Minnesota Cities sued the state’s legislature and governor in order to continue receiving aid after a government shutdown that July. The cities eventually agreed to accept a $138 million dollar cut in the funds to be received — a reduction of about 19%.

3) Virginia
> Pct. decline in local funding: 8.5%
> Actual decline local funding: $1 billion (4th largest) 
> State budget shortfall (2010): 24.1% (20th largest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -4.7% (tied at 22nd largest decline)

In February 2010, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell proposed a total of $2.3 billion in cuts in order to balance the state budget without any increase in taxes. As a result of these cuts, the state of Virginia reduced transfers to its localities by more than $1 billion. The city of Roanoke, which was forced to raise taxes after the state’s budget was passed, responded to these cuts with particular frustration. Local officials in Roanoke denounced the state initiatives as indirect taxation, because they required municipalities to raise taxes to cover those funding cuts.

2) Wyoming
> Pct. decline in local funding: 9.5%
> Actual decline local funding: $185 million (19th largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 1.8% (the smallest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: +2.5% (2nd largest increase)

Between 2009 and 2010, Wyoming’s local governments’ revenue suffered from what Pew calls a “one-two punch”: shrinking in both state aid and property taxes. According to Census State Government Finance data, state aid fell by $185 million, while tax revenues declined by 21.9% — the highest proportional decline in the country. Belt-tightening measures were necessary for the state to avoid layoffs of government officials. According to theBillings Gazette, officials at the Natrona County Detention Center were told that if they did not comply with budget cuts as high as 27%, they would be forced to lay off almost a third of their staff.

1) New Mexico
> Pct. decline in local funding: 10.4%
> Actual decline local funding: $498 million (9th largest)
> State budget shortfall (2010): 18.2% (11th smallest)
> Pct. change in gov’t workers per capita: -5.4% (16th largest decline)

Out of all states, New Mexico cut funding to its localities the most, reducing spending by more than 10% between 2009 and 2010. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, these cuts resulted in fewer funds for higher education, the state workforce and services for the elderly and the disabled. The Santa Fe New Mexican writes that the Santa Fe School District endured the worst of its fiscal cuts in the 2009 – 2010 school years, when they were underfunded by about $11 million. After three consecutive years of deep budget cuts, New Mexico is now projecting a budget surplus of $250 million in 2012. NPR reports that the New Mexican government is now debating whether to restore some services.