There are consequences for both courses of action, if you bail out the banks -you are diluting the wealth of primarily poor people who save instead of invest -r

There are consequences for both courses of action, if you bail out the banks -you are diluting the wealth of primarily poor people who save instead of invest -real estate prices will scream upwards having barely paused for the fed rate hikes -you will distribute more of societies scarce resources into already failed investments, less of what people want and more of what people demonstrably dont. Only one of these two options is actually moral; in the case of no bailout, investors who have provably acknowledged the risk of investing, and who still recklessly barrelled cash into an industry that everyone knows is a bubble, take a haircut based on the risk they themselves chose. In the bailout reality (aka reality because we all know how this ends), you commit mass theft to bail out a failed investment. We can cut onions over how broken the stock market is for the average person, as I do on a daily basis, but that isnt justification to absolve people of the basic and predictable economic consequences of their choices, and certainly not to place those consequences on someone elses back. You won't have fixed anything, investors wont get spooked, prices wont finally come down, they will see the blood in the water and continue doubling down on risky investments. They now know the government would sooner shake you down then let their investment fail, its all upside for them and all downsides fall to you, humble tax payer.