If by "get too wild" you mean "achieve regulatory capture over the agencies and frameworks intended to prevent them from engaging in short-term profitable but l

If by "get too wild" you mean "achieve regulatory capture over the agencies and frameworks intended to prevent them from engaging in short-term profitable but long-term risky behaviors", then, sure. But you can swap out currencies and still have that exact same problem. In some Bitcoin-based parallel universe, you'd just have a different set of companies hiring the same lobbyists and cutting the same political contribution checks, in order to achieve the same sort of favorable regulation and risk shielding. This is the key problem that I think Bitcoin boosters fail to grasp: the government didn't bail out the banks because they're banks. The government bailed out the banks because they got themselves into a position where they could demand a bailout and get it. There's nothing about banking qua banking that allows this; you can do it (and historically it has happened) in other industries. Blockchains don't fix that, because it's not a technological problem. It's a political and sociological problem, not amenable to quick technical fixes.