voices.washingtonpost.com
If you looked at a logjam, you would see that letting it build up would lead to a potential catastrophe, as waters backed up behind it and as the weight of water, logs and debris piles up behind the dammed up stream. Everything floods upstream of the blockage until the weight causes a complete collapse. Then everything downstream floods and can be devastated.
In a sense, this liquidity crunch is causing everything to flood behind it. No one's balance sheet is sound enough to be marked to market, because no one wants to make a market in the securities on each other's balance sheets. And if there is no market to mark to, the assets, no matter how real they may be, temporarily have no value.
What's happening is that the government is advocating lifting the logjam of illiquidity out of the banking system, and then letting the waters -- capital -- flow between financial institutions again. Once that happens, the government can sell off the assets it acquired at fire sale prices. The most secure should be able to score a few bargains buying from the government, but the market will eventually repay the government most of the cost of the intervention.
From a value of services perspective, the liquidity injection seems warranted. And if the logjam disappears in a year, will have very good benefits to the economy for which ever candidate is in office next year. If the logjam is allowed to continue building, the US financial system will crack under the leverage of internal illiquidity -- and that could be catastrophic!