Panic First, Then Panic

“There will be horrific financial implications. More money will be needed for providing health care benefits that could otherwise be used for fighting fires or keeping libraries open.”

That is an expert quoted near the lead of an AP news story yesterday. The story was about the growing cost of public employee health benefits.

The very end of the same story has this quote from a different expert: “This isn’t Chicken Little. It’s wrong to panic, and it’s wrong to put your head in the sand and ignore the liability altogether. The middle ground of responsible funding is the way to go.”

Underfunded pension and health-benefit liabilities is a very, very serious issue for the long-term financial health of our governments at every level. But what is the best way to approach this problem?

To me, the first quote seeks to incite fear. Is that constructive, considering our judgment is impaired in the presence of fear? We can’t make good decisions when we feel fear. Especially decisions that will affect us for the next 50 to 100 years.

Which is more productive: to set about rationally assessing the scope of the problem so that we can begin to form a responsible solution, or running around in a panic that fire stations and libraries will have to close?