The government didn't step in and help get the banks and businesses back up and running for several reasons. Here are a few possible explanations:
1. Limited resources: The government may not have had enough financial resources or manpower to provide immediate assistance to every struggling bank or business. Rescuing a large number of entities can be a costly endeavor, and the government has to prioritize how it allocates its resources.
2. Moral hazard: The government may have been concerned about creating a moral hazard. This means that if the government repeatedly bails out failing banks and businesses, it may encourage risky behavior in the future. Entities may be more inclined to take on excessive risks, knowing that they could rely on government intervention if they fail.
3. Market forces: The government might have believed in the power of market forces to correct the situation. In a free market economy, businesses and banks that are unable to adapt or compete may fail, making room for new businesses and banks that can better serve the needs of the market.
4. Legal limitations: The government's ability to intervene in the operations of private banks and businesses may be restricted by existing laws and regulations. In some cases, legal hurdles can prevent the government from directly assisting or taking control of struggling entities.
5. Political considerations: The decision to provide assistance to banks and businesses can be politically sensitive. The government may face criticism or backlash for using taxpayer money to rescue failing entities, especially if it is seen as favoring specific industries or businesses over others.
These are some of the reasons why the government may not have stepped in to help get the banks and businesses back up and running. It's important to note that each situation is unique, and the government's response can vary depending on the specific circumstances and policies in place.