Surely it's the case that we should measure necessity on a case-by-case basis, though, isn't it?  Was Bear Stearns really critical to our survival?  (Maybe so, and in that case a bailout is warranted to save the banking system, but I'm skeptical of the apparent need to deem everything on Wall Street as "Too Big to Fail," as we're seeing more and more of in the press.)  As you know, socializing the losses this way has a tendency to sometimes leave taxpayers subsidizing amazing levels of dumbfuckery -- the American air carriers, the American car makers, etc -- as the expense of obviously superior products.  The moral hazard argument is a fair one.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!