The data has been there all along...here is an updated pdf/"database" from the IMF that tells it all. On page 6 of the pdf - it says that empirical evidence shows that bailouts don't work and just end up burdening tax payers and worsening the credit crisis... http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2008/wp08224.pdf -gastropod
That's what I've been saying, the bailout(s) will only serve to increase volatility. I happen to like volatility so you don't see me complaining... governments are typically political disasters. I think the current admin will be a disaster.
It goes both ways. The booms are a function of economic policy, and the busts are inevitable. Without supporting economic policy, the busts still happen and are even more damaging. Unless you are going to provide a quantitative analysis of why intervention is so much worse than no intervention, your comment isn't even worth making.
Increasing cash at banks might prevent a credit crisis but to stimulate the economy The Government might need to spend money and create jobs. I wonder what The Government might spend money on. Maybe replace bridges, build a new World Trade Center, or build hydrogen fuel stations along every highway? And these spending projects might be in addition to the US $ 700 billion bailout.