Should the government bear the economic risk?

We will illustrate this general question with the case of France. The current trend is for the government to bear more and more of the economic risks. The government: Guarantees regulated savings; Guarantees corporate loans and public sector bond issues; Of course guarantees public banks; Is called upon to cover major risks (climate , natural, cybersecurity , etc.) and export risks; Bears part of the innovation risk. Some economists also suggest that the government should go further in guaranteeing economic risks (and financing the economy), the argument being that risky investments must be financed while households want risk-free savings, and that population ageing will increase this rejection of risk-taking . It is also claimed that the risk borne by financial intermediaries is too great. But it is not at all optimal to make the government bear more and more risks, and we should not resign ourselves to the fact that households do not bear any risk. This is because: It gives rise to a moral hazard (savers will buy too many risky assets if they are guaranteed by the government, and will finance projects that are too risky without analysing them); unless the government guarantee is priced correctly, which is not always the case; If the government incurs significant losses, it will have to refinance them by raising taxes, and in reality , it does not really bear the risk, it returns it to households.