1) I’m not trying to convince you. That is a fool’s errand in my online experience. I’m far more likely to come across adamant people than I am to come across s

1) I’m not trying to convince you. That is a fool’s errand in my online experience. I’m far more likely to come across adamant people than I am to come across sensible ones, so there’s no point trying to convince anyone. 2) if you think the end of money isn’t an apocalypse, then I don’t know what to tell you. Like sure, we may have done a debt jubilee, picked up the pieces and marched on, but chances were more that things would collapse utterly. Yes, the world cannot exist without modern finance just as it cannot exist without civil engineering or farming. It can technically run without computers although it’ll be a shell of a shell of what we have today. But money is beyond all meaning of the word “essential”. It is a mark of civilization. All civilizations that moved beyond barter came to the same way of thinking - representative tokens i.e. money. Don’t buy into modern leftist propaganda. Wall Street is corrupt but that doesn’t mean capitalism is bad and money shouldn’t exist. 3) 2008 was much, MUCH more existential than “a few banks failed” and you have not read enough if your takeaway from your reading was “the govt was wrong to bail them out”. The govt was right to bail out the institution. The corruption that pervades Wall Street is removed by a layer at which the govt failed and allowed failed CEOs and political operators to make overnight fortunes by announcing taxpayer funded support. The alternative of not bailing them out was the total collapse of the US financial system - the biggest, most elaborate and deeply connected system on the face of the planet facilitating your every requirement from clean drinking water to toilet paper to the smartphone or whatever you’re reading this on. If it’d collapsed, no amount of scenario building could come close to the destruction that would’ve been wrought upon the planet. You think this is hyperbole. It is not. Even people outside the US agree on that assessment. Your reading has been very selective and surface level because it is not your daily job. You likely read propagandists and other types of pundits who are not experts in the field.