Talk about a “stress test,” said Kathleen Pender in the San Francisco Chronicle. With the Obama administration’s announcement that it will release some results of its financial stress tests on the largest 19 U.S. banks, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner finds himself in a “no-win situation.” He can hardly backtrack now, but if he reveals meaningful information, depositors and investors will surely flee the unhealthiest banks.
So what if they do? said Paul LaMonica in CNNmoney.com. “It’s not the job of the Treasury or FDIC to prevent investors from selling off shares of banks that have poor fundamentals.” The Treasury has to accept that there are good banks—maybe Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo—and bad banks, and it’s better if we all know which are which.
“Uncle Sam doesn’t recommend stocks,” said Scott Reeves in Minyanville, so what business does it have giving a “de facto” thumbs-up or thumbs-down to individual banks? An implicit “nay” would mean “curtains for a weaker bank.”
Precisely, said Massimo Calabresi in Time. The banks are balking at selling their toxic assets at today’s market prices, despite Obama’s appeals and our “massive subsidies.” The stress tests could be the “weapon” Team Obama needs to make banks “clean up their acts,” and balance sheets.
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- Why you should stop believing in evolution
- How Israel's hawks intimidated and silenced the last remnants of the anti-war left
- The secret to handling pressure like astronauts, Navy SEALs, and samurai
- Why your employer should clean your house and do your laundry
- Why China thinks it could defeat the U.S. in battle
- The big policy question libertarians can't answer
- What you need to know before you support the police in Ferguson
- The real lesson of Rick Perry's mug shot
- How the West produces jihadi tourists
- Welcome to the age of ambivalent feminism
Subscribe to the Week