When talking about nationalizing banks Sweden is often mentioned as a model for success. The problem is, this isn’t exactly true. Planet Money talked to the vice chairman of the Swedish Central Bank. The high points:

1. Sweden had only 4 to 6 big banks (big relative to their economy)

2. The government owned 80% of one of the largest banks even before the crisis began.

3. When Sweden poured money into the bank they acted as the owner.

4. The owner of another of those big banks didn’t (or couldn’t) put any more money into it. They literally forced the government to take the bank, the government didn’t want it.

5. These were the only two banks nationalized, the one the government already owned and the one they were forced to take. None of the other big banks were nationalized.

The vide chairman does think nationalizing some banks is a good idea, but Sweden doesn’t provide an example for us to follow.

Planet Money also has a good post about why we can’t have a healthy debate about nationalizing banks.

So, if I can report on NPR that someone told me the government is considering nationalization (I’m not, by the way. Nobody has told me that), then those banks might collapse immediately and the government would have no choice. They’d have to nationalize.