My biggest concern and issue with the federal government backstopping pensions is that the vast majority of people would now be paying for benefits for people who rendered services in areas they didn't live. Because the populace of one city voted to give certain benefits to public sector employees why should I be held accountable for that decision? I neither had a vote nor partook of their services.
I am sure I am being very naive here but this seems to me to be the essence of taxation without representation.
To me, there's a difference between something you need to live that was made poisonous by the government requireing aid and former managers pulling pensions of $200k+ a year. If I lived in Michigan, I'd have a big problem bailing out the FDNY pension fund when I heard that. It's endemic too, look up "LIRR Disability abuse".
I am fine with bailouts as long as systems are being put in place to avoid repeating it in the future. That's for Flint, pensions or banks. Obviously the prevention step never happens....
Neighboring towns near Flint took care of the problem at their own expense. Is it fair to them that Flint doesn't have to pay? Perhaps we should pay those neighboring town back, with interest, for the work that they did? Aren't we encouraging irresponsible behavior if we pay for Flint but not the other towns?
I am sure I am being very naive here but this seems to me to be the essence of taxation without representation.