My understanding of the issue is that it was mostly a scaling falicy. A ratio of assets to loans was asserted by the federal government that banks and credit un

My understanding of the issue is that it was mostly a scaling falicy. A ratio of assets to loans was asserted by the federal government that banks and credit unions must operate within, but that ratio was too onerous for small players like credit unions with less than $1B in assets. I did marketing for a credit union that had to constantly stop doing auto loans or quickly double down to maintain a tightrope walk to stay inside those ratios. It was much easier to comply with at larger scale. Bad maths made a decent rule into something that had unintended consequences.