I feel it's a little disingenuous to call it a "subsidy" since the taxpayers aren't actually writing the banks a check for $83 billion. But the key point is sti

I feel it's a little disingenuous to call it a "subsidy" since the taxpayers aren't actually writing the banks a check for $83 billion. But the key point is still spot on: without the implied backstop of a government bailout the banks would pay what everyone else must pay to borrow money, etc. Too big to fail is simply a euphemism these days for "The government will take care of everything no matter now stupid and reckless we act." This attitude really must go. How should that be accomplished? I don't know. One thing is for certain: the banks will drag their heels kicking and screaming should someone try to change the status quo. And they'll probably get their way - but it should still be attempted.