That would all be ideal and ok if fractional banking wasn't a thing. Your bank makes money out of investing your money. That's just how it works. But for some r

That would all be ideal and ok if fractional banking wasn't a thing. Your bank makes money out of investing your money. That's just how it works. But for some reason, some banks are more privileged than others. Citibank can't stop receiving bailouts every 50 microseconds because their management sucks. Silicon Valley Bank depositors receive back money from _uninsured_ deposits. Ultimately, someone has to pay the bill. I'm not saying prevent the contagion is a bad thing. We all know what happens when contagion becomes a systemic problem (2008). What I'm suggesting is that the fact a bank like this can even fail in a way like this is absurd. I'm mostly someone who defends less regulation over more, but if we are going to regulate banks we need to hold everyone to the same standards, and make sure everyone is accountable for their mistakes and risks taken. If that requires the FDIC raising the amount of deposits that are insured, sure, go with it, but creating "exceptions" every time a medium-sized bank fails is sure to create moral problems, corruption and increase inequality systematically. What I'm talking about is thing such as the "Reform Act" from 2018, which was basically what allowed this Silicon Valley Bank disaster to happen [0]. [0]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mayrarodriguezvalladares/2023/03/12/how-trumps-deregulation-sowed-the-seeds-for-silicon-valley-banks-demise/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/mayrarodriguezvalladares/2023/0...