In this article, Acharya and Franks analyze the capital budgeting practices of banks, and conclude that State guarantees – both explicit and implicit - already distorted markets even before the crisis. They say that banks should be forced to price debt as if there were no guarantee, or (presumably) that regulators should render all guarantees explicit and charge banks for them at the market rate, regardless of whether or not the bank actually wants the guarantee in question (though maybe it would be sufficient for there to be transparency on who has taken up the guarantee and who has not). One of many arguments leading to the conclusion that more state guarantees to banks may have a role to play in the short term, but in the long term are really going to make the problem worse.