In the same way, surely you don't expect taxpayers to agree with what SVB's account holders want, just because they are on this site!

FWIW, I am a taxpayer and am not a SVB bank account holder.

Thank you I do understand that.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of us collectively trying to manage the latest collapse, perhaps we could impose actual requirements (not regulations) on banks. There have been 562 bank collapses since 2001. I doubt that many people who work outside of finance would think the balance sheets of those banks look like anything like what people would expect in a stable "bank".

It's insane that very few banks in the country can reasonably withstand bank runs. The reason? They have no money on hand, because they are gambling. Sure, the ecosystem would change, but that's not a bad thing.

1. It won't spin out of control. 2. Stock in SVB (market capitalization) is $6B. Deposits are almost $200B. Depositors who had put more than 250k did so willingly knowing the risks.