Wow, so many things wrong here.
First of all, investment banks and insurance companies are indistinguishable.
This is patently untrue. Sure investment banks to make counter party deals that they believe will insure them against losses on other investments, and people refer to this as "insurance." But it is nothing like insurance. The insurance business is based on statistics and actuarial data. The data are used to make rational decisions about how much to charge a particular group for insuring a particular risk. The risks are well known and thoroughly accounted for. In fact insurance is lots like the casino business. Sure the individual transactions are gambles but in the aggregate the house wins a certain percentage. Investment banking is more like the customer at a casino, where entire stakes are bet in single transactions based on a hunch.
why wouldn't you want a banker to be attracted to money?
Personally I want my banker to be boring and conservative because I want my money to be there when I need it. I also want my banker to ethically handle my money in a way that benefits me, not him.
Not everyone should be socially conscious as a job requirement.
I'm astonished. Did you actually say that? Being "socially conscious" is nothing more than being aware of consequences and making ethical decisions. Being ethical shouldn't be a requirement of employment, it is a requirement of participation in society at all.
If it makes them better bankers, then more power to them.
That's the whole point, it doesn't make them better bankers. It makes them more likely to cheat, steal, and lie. Is that really what you look for in a banker?