Understanding how banks react to unexpected events has become a very important economic and social question, especially since the financial crisis (Ivashina and Scharfstein, 2010; Puri et al., 2011). Whereas previous financial crises had largely stayed in the realm of finance, or very limited areas of the economy, the financial crisis of 2007-2008 demonstrated that unexpected financial shocks can have severe implications for the real economy in general, impacting the lives of a large cross-section of the population, for example through general reductions in employment (Chodorow- Reich, 2014; Popov and Rocholl, 2017). This new realization has led to an extensive literature on how banks react to unexpected events, especially if and how they transfer such shocks to firms and households. As a result, understanding exactly how shocks are transferred not only between banks (Popov and Udell, 2012; Schnabl, 2012), but also between banks and firms has become a crucial aspect of financial research (Peek and Rosengren, 2000; Gan, 2007; Ongena et al., 2015; Acharya et al., 2018; Gropp et al., 2018; Huber, 2018). It has returned into focus the idea that a functioning connection between banks and firms constitutes a crucial part of a well-functioning economy. This thesis aims to contribute to the understanding of how this bank-firm relationship functions and what pitfalls it might entail.

We analyze whether social distress from income comparisons affects attitudes towards the integration of economies. Using Germany’s division as natural experiment, we find that East Germans’ feelings of relative deprivation with respect to better-off West Germans led to significantly more support for the upcoming German re-unification.