This case is very likely of model "too large to fail".
Last time it used, when appear high probability of recession, and govt prints money and feed them to larges financial companies, to keep them alive.
Opposite to print money, usually, to suffer huge losses of popularity, because without these measures, could close large chain of connected to subjects companies, will need to spend money to pay for unemployment.
So I think, Carter's decisions where because it was easy solution for him, and less fear than to close.
Examples of brave side politics are very rare, one of them Thatcher, decided to close mining companies, which decades fed by govt subsidies, which costed her very expensive.
Last time it used, when appear high probability of recession, and govt prints money and feed them to larges financial companies, to keep them alive.
Opposite to print money, usually, to suffer huge losses of popularity, because without these measures, could close large chain of connected to subjects companies, will need to spend money to pay for unemployment.
So I think, Carter's decisions where because it was easy solution for him, and less fear than to close.
Examples of brave side politics are very rare, one of them Thatcher, decided to close mining companies, which decades fed by govt subsidies, which costed her very expensive.