> Right, they bailed out corporations and threw people out of their homes. Never forgive, never forget.

Who is "they"? The fed I presume? I doubt they were directly involved in foreclosures.

Bailing out companies keeps people in jobs & backstops the assets that comprise retirement/pension systems, both of which keep people in their homes. You could find ways of keeping more people in their homes but they’d almost certainly include bailing out companies, it’s easy to implement and cost effective.

> Right, they bailed out corporations and threw people out of their homes. Never forgive, never forget.

So you would've preferred that the whole system came crashing down and believe that average people would've had a better long term outcome from that?

I think there’s a good argument to be made that lots of companies doing bad things and taking bad risks socialize their failure, thus learning nothing except they can get away with it again on the publics dime. Being too big to fail is an added bonus. How is the public better off in that scenario? Regulation can act as a bandaid but there is always another loophole to exploit.

There could have been a round of modern “trust busting” ala Teddy Roosevelt. Too big to fail is a clear center of too much market power. (That the smaller banks like credit unions weathered that era better underscores the need for some “right sizing”.)