Your analysis and conclusions are accurate based on conventional understanding of credit markets. However, consider the alternate scenario which is resisted fiercely by businesses, pro-capitalistic economists and politicians. Which is: We all know that risks exist and that financial stability has been affected by risks that can't be scheduled. Why do not businesses save much more money during good times to weather bad times, and not purchase insurance against bad times? I'll use airlines as an example. During my lifetime multiple threats to the airlines have occurred which should have prompted voluntary or legislative required savings allowing airlines to function for 12-24 months during reduced travel. This would affect credit much more positively than relying on government intervention. Alas, your article is another example of how capitalism in the U.S. is built on a socialistic foundation because businesses and politicians don't want to build such expenses into company operations. Contrast this with mutual insurance companies which save large amounts to cover insured losses. Insurers can't tell policy holders they don't have the money to help them recover from the unexpected.