Yeah but the problem is that nobody wrote that down beforehand. It's not good to make it up as we go during emergencies. It's good to have clear rules written down ahead of time.
Complicated, fragile emergencies are precisely the time to consider exceptions to hard rules. After all, if all our rules were perfect, we wouldn’t have an emergency to begin with.
I feel the need to say this in every comment because I don't expect people to read my other comments, but I do support what was done here, assuming the private buyer solution was tried and it failed, I just also think it's bad that things are run this way.
I disagree that this necessarily sets the new rule. Sure, sometimes it creates new precedents, but the necessity for an exception should go on to inform new hard set rules to prevent the necessity for exceptions in the first place. In this case, a return to a more regulated banking sector, hopefully.
This is not dissimilar from highly agile work environments that require frequent process changes to achieve the ultimate goal.
I would make a very large wager with you that in a decade it will be unquestioned that last night was the night US bank deposits of any size became fully government backed. Maybe that's even a good thing! I dunno, I have no idea what all the downstream effects will be. But the banking system now works a different way than it did on Thursday morning, and I think it's reasonable to question the wisdom of a change this huge being made over one random weekend.