Yes, but the world doesn't work better if everyone maximally leverages their way into every weakly EV-positive (or EV-negative) high volatility play. If everyone is maximally leveraged, any tiny negative disturbance wipes out all wealth.

At some point, you're just hoping to get lucky, and to leave other people (debtors, governments) holding the bill if you don't. This is what people talk about when they criticize others for "privatizing profits, socializing risk."

Economists have a word for it, too: "moral hazard." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

Back to Boeing: Boeing put up really good numbers by gutting engineering and manufacturing organizations, hoping it would all turn out okay. For awhile it did, but then it didn't.

And it's questionable how much of these costs Boeing is going to bear, because there's a whole lot of talk in policymaking circles about how to keep an important defense manufacturer and top manufacturer alive (through contracts, tariffs, and supportive policy).

Creditors know they are taking a risk when they loan out money, and that risk is priced into the interest rate.

The moral hazard comes into play when the risk is forced on some unwitting bystander.

> that risk is priced into the interest rate.

A degree of risk is priced into the interest rate. I still have a fiduciary duty to my lenders to not take undue, undisclosed risks. In practice, people get away with this except in the most egregious cases, but that doesn't make it less wrong.

Worse, systemic risk isn't priced into the interest rate, because the government tends to bail out the banks.

Everyone using leverage and betting on things going up forever is a really big part of how you get 2008. A lot of people made a ton of money in the run-up to 2008 (privatized profits); the population as a whole paid the costs (socialized losses).

edit: I wrote "borrowers" above when I meant lenders.