Detroit ranked #49 out of 116 for fiscal health

[BankruptcyGuy]

Not too shabby. Chicago and NYC are the lowest -ranked.

Our peer group is San Jose, Memphis and indianapolis. Surprised that Florida and Texas cities are so low.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/0...-Cities-Ranked

[313WX]

Not too shabby. Chicago and NYC are the lowest -ranked.

Our peer group is San Jose, Memphis and indianapolis. Surprised that Florida and Texas cities are so low.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/0...-Cities-Ranked

To be clear, the list above is ONLY based on long-term debt obligations.

Thus, it's a no-brainer that cities that have recently gone through bankruptcy or are relatively young / small in size would be ranked higher.

In terms of cash flow solvency, NYC and Chicago are both very much fiscally healthy, significantly more so than Detroit [[in fact, NYC has a massive budget surplus). And cash flow solvency is what really matters when it comes to potential bankruptcy.

[BankruptcyGuy]

There were five factors: 1. the ratio of a city’s general fund balance to its expenditures [[40 percent weighting)2. the ratio of its long term obligations [[including OPEB but excluding pensions) to total government-wide revenues [[30 percent weighting)
3. the ratio of actuarially determined pension contributions to total government-wide revenues [[10 percent weighting)
4. change in local unemployment rate [[10 percent weighting)
5. change in property values [[10 percent weighting).

Dont know where you got the idea that Chicago has a balanced budget. It does not, and it is not particularly close to one, either.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...-137-6-million

[313WX]

There were five factors: 1. the ratio of a city’s general fund balance to its expenditures [[40 percent weighting)2. the ratio of its long term obligations [[including OPEB but excluding pensions) to total government-wide revenues [[30 percent weighting)
3. the ratio of actuarially determined pension contributions to total government-wide revenues [[10 percent weighting)
4. change in local unemployment rate [[10 percent weighting)
5. change in property values [[10 percent weighting).

Dont know where you got the idea that Chicago has a balanced budget. It does not, and it is not particularly close to one, either.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...-137-6-million

Yes, I saw that list. And it gets back to exactly what I said, that it's a no-brainer that cities that have recently gone through bankruptcy or are relatively young / small in size would be ranked higher.

"Fiscal health" by the source's very narrow standard of it [[long-term debt obligations) is an incomplete measure of how *healthy* [[as in desirable, livable, etc.) a city is, given the number of variables involved. And I also find it disingenuous to weigh property value increases and unemployment [[matrices the average person actually care about when moving to or investing in a city) so low in any study.

As far as Chicago specifically, what you failed to mention is their budget shortfall [[which was probably exacerbated by the Great Recession like in every other city) is the smallest it's been in a decade. And in fact, given that Chicago still has a vibrant and sizable middle class tax break as well as a sizable number of major revenue-generating companies in its borders, there's plenty of room for them to easily make up that shortfall over the next few years.

Meanwhile, even in the wake of bankruptcy, Detroit doesn't have the luxury to increase taxes to generate revenue if it must. And that's not going to change, at least not within the foreseeable future.

[BankruptcyGuy]

I don't think what is "desirable" or "livable" are objective enough concepts to be measured in the way you suggest. The cities ranked right around Detroit are neither universally small [[San Jose is bigger) or universally young [[Memphis is a pretty old city).

If you think that Chicago's finances are in good shape, you're entitled to your opinion. You could make a fair amount of money betting against default, considering their bond ratings are almost the worst in the US.

[Jason]

It seems like a fair enough way to measure it to me, at least for a list like this.

It's measuring the health of the city government's finances, not how healthy the city is in other ways.

But I think city government is very important to the city's overall well being and having good finances makes everything else a lot simpler and a lot easier. Good finances means the city has the wiggle room to undertake important projects and the ability to borrow money affordably. The light rail would be going to 8 mile and it would have been finished a few years ago if the city had better finances and that's just one example.

I hope that in the future Detroit will be even higher up in lists like that, and also that the taxes paid will be more proportional to the services provided.

[[Don't read the comments section of that article though...)