This is  the second of three posts based on an interview that Ricardo Caballero of MIT did  with Douglas Clement of the Minneapolis Fed.
Here's Caballero on why it's misguided, once a financial is actually underway, to worry that financial bailouts will create moral hazard incentives for high-risk behavior.
"I still recall  politicians and economists calling for the need to teach  lessons (in a punitive  sense) to the financial system in the middle of  the crisis. In fact, I think  Lehman happened to a large extent due to  the political pressures stemming from  this view. What timing! ...
"I draw an analogy between panics and sudden  cardiac arrest.   We all understand that it’s very  important to have a good diet and  good exercise in order to prevent cardiac  arrest. But once you’re in a  seizure, that’s a  totally secondary issue. You’re not going to solve  the crisis by  improving the diet of the patient. You don’t have  time  for that. You need a financial defibrillator, not a lecture. ...
The main dogma behind the great resistance in the policy  world to  institutionalize a public insurance provision is the idea that if the   financial defibrillator were to be implanted in an economy, banks and  their  creditors would abandon all forms of a healthy financial  lifestyle and would  thus dramatically increase the chances of a sudden  financial arrest episode.
"This moral hazard perspective is the equivalent of  discouraging the  placement of defibrillators in public places out of concern  that, upon  seeing them, people would have a sudden urge to consume  cheeseburgers  because they would realize that their chances of surviving sudden   cardiac arrest had risen as a result of the ready access to  defibrillators.
"But actual behavior is less forward-looking and rational  than is  implied by that logic. People indeed consume more cheeseburgers than   they should, but this is more or less independent of whether or not   defibrillators are visible. Surely there is a need for advocating  healthy  habits, but no one in their right mind would propose doing so  by making all  available defibrillators inaccessible. Such a policy  would be both ineffective  as an incentive mechanism and a human tragedy  when an episode of sudden cardiac  arrest occurs. 
"I think this is one of the many instances when economists  and  politicians choose to solve a second-order problem they understand  rather  than focusing on what actually happens in real life."
 
