Today’s news of two more Western regional bank failures (1st National Bank of Nevada and First Heritage) is a harsh reminder that we are in peculiar economic times. As Flexo over at Consumerism Commentary explains, there is no need for most of us to be worried about our own money in an FDIC insured bank. During the savings and loan crisis in the other Bush administration, I had a CD in an S&L that failed, and the only impact on me was that I got a letter explaining that my principal was safe, but that the outlandish interest promised by the failed institution was merely a fantasy.
All this reassurance presupposes that one has money in the bank. However, with the price of food and fuel rising, with many people deep in debt, with homes falling in value, the most pressing choices facing most people are not “Where shall I invest my money?” ethically or otherwise. The questions have more to do with “which bill do I pay first?” or “how much can I afford to help family or friends in financial straits?”
I learned one very important aspect of ethical decision making in a lecture by Dr. Arthur Gross-Schaefer of Loyola Marymount University. He said to us (a class of rabbinical students) that there are almost always more than two alternatives for solving any dilemma. It is human nature to frame choices as having only two possible solutions (“I must choose between this and that“) but with a little thought, there are often other options we can choose.
It is frustrating and frightening to see bank failures in the news and to hear words like “stagflation.” The challenge for individuals is to maintain the imagination and the courage to see and to act upon our best options, whatever they may be.
