For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.
But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.
As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.
By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.
Argentina's financial panic and the run on its banks that ensued, as well as Asia's financial crisis of 1997, have forced a number of countries to consider adopting deposit insurance schemes to protect their citizens' savings. But is deposit insurance the best defense against bank panics?
Deposit insurance was a response to banking crises of the type that plagued the United States until the 1930's. The first explicit scheme was introduced in America after the Great Depression and initially seemed an unmitigated success. Panics no longer occurred, which stabilized the financial system and contributed to sustained post-war economic growth.
Deposit insurance did away with financial panics because bank runs are typically driven by a self-fulfilling prophecy. They occur when a bank's clients fear that most of their fellow depositors will withdraw their funds. Because banks service their depositors on a first-come-first-served basis, those who wait risk being left empty-handed, because the bank may be forced to liquidate its long term-assets at a loss and run out of resources. So fear of a panic can create a panic. This is highly inefficient, because while it is individually rational for depositors to want their money immediately, the bank might have been able to service all of them had they been collectively patient.
We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.
To continue reading, subscribe now.
Subscribe
orRegister for FREE to access two premium articles per month.
Register
Already have an account? Log in