January 26, 2010 1:14 PM
- Text
Geithner Right Not to Endorse "Move Your Money" Campaign
(MoneyWatch)
Bloggers seem surprised that Treasury chief Tim Geithner wouldn't whip out his bullhorn to champion Arianna Huffington's campaign to move money out of big financial institutions into community banks.
I'd be surprised if he did. For better or for worse, top U.S. economic officials aren't exactly in the habit of urging depositors to flee any bank, big or small. Moreover, those Wall Street institutions that people are expected to abandon survived in part through massive infusions of taxpayer capital. What's the likelihood of a Treasury Secretary -- any Treasury Secretary -- encouraging folks to withdraw money en masse from companies they just saved at enormous expense?
I put it at about zero. As an avid Geithner basher myself, I don't think his stance on the "Move your Money" effort betrays bias so much as common sense, along with a certain official reticence about fanning the populist flames.
Look, I like a good insurrection as much as the next pseudo-revolutionary. But there's at least one good reason to question the Huffington campaign, which aims to "limit the power of the big banks and create a more sane, stable financial system": It'll never work. That's because Move Your Money is based on a flawed premise.
Individuals depositing money in neighborhood banks don't keep big banks from getting it. And if smaller institutions somehow were suddenly flooded with capital, they'd almost certainly redeposit the money in larger banks. Move Your Money, carried to its logical extreme, is more likely to recirculate capital through the banking system like Escher's waterfall than it is to enhance financial sanity.
Of course, there are good reasons to support community banks. The service is often friendly and attentive. It benefits the local economy by increasing their available credit (although the skeptics among us might question that proposition by highlighting small banks' enthusiasm for commercial real estate, currently in flames). Lollipops. And it can be therapeutic for anyone, like me, with a brontosaurus-sized bone to pick with Wall Street.
But one can understand why Geithner would take a pass on this one.
Bloggers seem surprised that Treasury chief Tim Geithner wouldn't whip out his bullhorn to champion Arianna Huffington's campaign to move money out of big financial institutions into community banks.I'd be surprised if he did. For better or for worse, top U.S. economic officials aren't exactly in the habit of urging depositors to flee any bank, big or small. Moreover, those Wall Street institutions that people are expected to abandon survived in part through massive infusions of taxpayer capital. What's the likelihood of a Treasury Secretary -- any Treasury Secretary -- encouraging folks to withdraw money en masse from companies they just saved at enormous expense?
I put it at about zero. As an avid Geithner basher myself, I don't think his stance on the "Move your Money" effort betrays bias so much as common sense, along with a certain official reticence about fanning the populist flames.
Look, I like a good insurrection as much as the next pseudo-revolutionary. But there's at least one good reason to question the Huffington campaign, which aims to "limit the power of the big banks and create a more sane, stable financial system": It'll never work. That's because Move Your Money is based on a flawed premise.
Individuals depositing money in neighborhood banks don't keep big banks from getting it. And if smaller institutions somehow were suddenly flooded with capital, they'd almost certainly redeposit the money in larger banks. Move Your Money, carried to its logical extreme, is more likely to recirculate capital through the banking system like Escher's waterfall than it is to enhance financial sanity.
Of course, there are good reasons to support community banks. The service is often friendly and attentive. It benefits the local economy by increasing their available credit (although the skeptics among us might question that proposition by highlighting small banks' enthusiasm for commercial real estate, currently in flames). Lollipops. And it can be therapeutic for anyone, like me, with a brontosaurus-sized bone to pick with Wall Street.
But one can understand why Geithner would take a pass on this one.
-
Alain Sherter Alain Sherter is an award-winning business journalist who has written for The Deal, MarketWatch and Thomson Financial Media. Follow him on Twitter at @Asherter.
Follow on Twitter »
Latest Now in MoneyWatch
- Ohio unemployment hits 3-year-low
- Jill on Money: Retirement investing, allocation, long term care
- Could "web-lining" be dangerous?
- Insurers respond cautiously to contraceptive plan
- Judge: Legally, breastfeeding not related to pregnancy
- Budget deficit drops to $27 billion in January
- Why the Powerball Jackpot is part of my investment strategy
- Is the new VW Beetle diesel worth the money?
- Consumer sentiment highlights risks to recovery
- Valentine blues? 10 best cities to be single
- December trade deficit widens to $48.8 billion
- Alcatel-Lucent returns to profit in 2011
- 6 things never to say in a performance review
- $26B mortgage deal: Who gets the money?
- Friendly's CEO steps down
- Quarterly loss hits $3.3B at Postal Service
- Greeks rail against cuts as EU demands more
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- Houston recalled as happy in days before death
- Pre-Grammy gala celebrates Whitney Houston's life
- The nation's weather
- Filmmaker Douglas Trumbull receives honorary Oscar
on Facebook
- Whitney Houston 1963-2012
- Adele sings a cappella for Anderson Cooper
- Remembering Whitney Houston 1963-2012
on CBS News






