TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says that CIT's approval as a bank holding company means anyone with a lending business can make it.

CIT Group (NYSE:CIT) made it to the finish line. They became a bank. After a sickening and seemingly endless slide for this lender, to $4 from $30, the whole way down with nothing but rosy projections, the company made it to bank holding company status and now it will be able to survive. Who knows, the company might even thrive, which makes that last stock offering seem pretty delectable.

The issue for me now is you are nothing if you are not a bank. You can see the ramifications of making this reckless lender -- it can say otherwise, but aren't we tired of all the say "otherwises" at this point; it's just better to admit it -- a bank. It means that anyone, no matter how profligate, no matter how wasted, can make it, if it has some sort of lending business.

I ask, why? What is the government's interest in saving Citigroup (NYSE: C)? Why bother? Should we look for other companies that lend and give them protection?

How about Las Vegas Sands (NYSE: LVS) )? When you go there you can borrow money. Prime candidate for it, I believe.

I know I was thrilled when all of those life insurers got around the law by buying little banks. That was good judgment in action.

The real worry, of course, is that without bank status, like the status of the utilities, how can you finance your way through this period? Can we make troubled retailers banks? If someone has a retail charge card, like Macy's (NYSE: M) ), isn't that the same as American Express (NYSE:AXP). Tons of retailers have charge cards and they are all candidates for bank status as they get in trouble. Neiman Marcus should have bank status.