Quite like the drinks analogy, but it falls over logic wise in a few places imo? The local bank has already transferred it's risk to

for drinkbond packaging. The collapsed drinkbond value won't hurt

as they have sold the bonds (although they get hit now on the original loan as local bank transferred the risk to them).
It seems to imply Helga's employees have lost their jobs because of the action of the bank, but in reality there would be no sales and no business without the credit terms. The money seems to be a lose a few times as well in ths scenario. For example Helga's bar suppliers go bust because she hasn't paid them, but that implies the money which Helga's bar borrowed has not been used and thus is available to repay the bank on demand?
The thrust of it is correct though. Effectively the government underwrites dubious loans on the back of which activity traders generate bonuses.