The size of a company can most certainly have an impact on the footprint that its failure can leave over an area in relation to time.

We can think of examples such as the automobile industry that can often provide critical economic development to an area by creating working-class jobs. If that company fails, it is undoubtedly the case that the resulting job losses would be more severe than those experienced in the wake of the closure of a smaller company, that only influences the local economy to a lower extent.

A governments responsibility to step in and offer capital restructuring opportunities should be carefully weighted against the social cost associated with the second best alternative use of that capital and should most certainly be structured in a way such as to encourage payback, profitability, and efficiency. As economists say, there is no such thing as a free lunch and so there should be no such thing as a free handout either.

Nevertheless, no company is bigger than the people it employs. Size offers no assurances against failure; thus a company cannot be too big to fail. However, government will tend to ensure survival of large companies, as their failure can be severe.

Word Count: 200