Good managers don't toss good money after bad. Now as we hear Bernie - bless his heart - is going to open up his wallet and help good teams out. You knew he would...he always has. At least with Lotus/FI/Sauber we can think back three seasons and at some point in that window say each of those teams did some impressive work. So no, you don't want those kinds of teams missing races.
If said competitors are not good teams a good manager lets them fail. A car always pounding around at the back, never really progressing isn't really creating revenue for anyone. Not the other teams, not the track promoters, TV companies, not FOM/CVC, and evidently not even for themselves! So why should the HRT/Caterham/Manor/Forti/Larrousse/Pacific/Simtek be propped up? How is Caterham going under effecting FOM's objective to promote the sport and make money?
You raise and interesting argument here, but I don't think Ecclestone advanced money to Lotus, FI and Sauber because they were well run or had a historical significance. More likely he did not want to breach his commitment to track promoters.
Just as the economic crisis in Europe shows that you can't fund economic growth with debt, it would seem you can't fund F1 performance with debt either.
FI and Sauber all have unsecured debt and that $10 million advancement might keep their head above water. The same can't be said for Lotus. Their debt is reputed to be $150 millions and clearly Genii Capital are no longer willing to underwrite it. It's not like they are too big to fail. The sums don't add up for Lotus since any money they might gain from improving their position no longer funds their costs resulting in more spirally debt. It remains whether their 'Good' managers will pull the plug or leave that to the banks as happened with Caterham.