I want to tell you a little about a friend of mine.
He’s got a PhD in economics and has been lecturing for years.
From time-to-time I say to him:
“Can I ask you a dumb question?”
He always replies with a wry smile
“Answering dumb questions is
practically my job description.”
We had one of our chats last night:
ME:
I keep hearing:“Strong banks
are essential to our economy.” But
surely, they should be saying: “A
strong banking system is essential to our
economy.”
The 1st statement leads us towards
bank rescues and nationalisations.
While the 2nd gives us more options.
My friend the economist:
Yes that is more accurate.
In fact, I was studying in Finland in 1992
as a series of banking collpases swept
across the Nordic countries. Many of the
possible options were tested with varying
success. Go on..
ME:
Well, I don’t know if this option was
available in the past… Why not establish 2
brand new internet-only banks in Ireland.
And capitalise them with the €15bn.
For that, you get 2 new banks. Each starting
with a clean sheet. Free to borrow.
Free to lend.
The advantages are you get a banking system.
You avoid nationalisation. You embrace pure
competition. And no money gets thrown
into a black hole.
Economist:
Yes. Pure internet banking wasn’t
an option in 1992. It could constitute a banking
system. Such new banks would be able and eager
to lend. The old banks could continue to deal with
cash. But if they do crash..?
ME:
If a physical branch network is important.
Co-opt the post office network.
Or the credit union network.
If internet access is important.
Support internet cafes.
Such an approach would be a snug fit with
the government’s policy of support
rural Ireland and the roll out of the national broadband scheme…
Economist:
Sounds like it could work. But you know the old
joke “If you want 4 opinions. Ask 2 economists”
So that’s it. My dumb question to you is “Why not?”
I’m hoping you can help me understand our options
a little bit better.