This debate examines whether governments should be obligated to intervene when companies with more than 50 employees face failure. At its core, it explores the balance between economic stability, public responsibility, and market dynamics. A “second chance” can take many forms, including financial assistance, loan guarantees, tax relief, restructuring support, or temporary nationalization. The underlying assumption is that larger employers play a significant role in local economies, supply chains, and social stability, making their collapse more disruptive than that of smaller firms. The issue also raises questions about how failure is defined and assessed. Is a company failing due to poor management, broader economic conditions, technological disruption, or unexpected crises? The debate considers whether size alone should justify government intervention, or whether additional criteria such as strategic importance, regional dependence, or long-term viability should be required. It also touches on the implications for public finances, fairness between businesses, and the precedent such policies set for future corporate behavior.