It is not good to make "keeping money in a bank" a dangerous operation with information overhead. That imposes both information and administrative costs on everyone just trying to do business in the entire economy. This is a deadweight loss.

It's not good to bail out the very people who enable these bankers and their "safe investments" either.

There is no such thing as "keeping money at the bank". People lend their money out to bankers so that it can be "efficiently allocated" and generate interest. If they don't realize this, that's their problem. If you want it to be a risk free operation, then say so. Say that you want fractional reserve banking to be outlawed. I'll agree with you.

> Say that you want fractional reserve banking to be outlawed. I'll agree with you.

Irrelevant what you and I think, forcing a system which will charge people rather than pay interest is unlikely to be popular with either customers or voters. As is causing random mom-and-pop depositors to lose money.

Popularity is irrelevant. This is what is right and how things should be. Obviously nobody wants to be held responsible for anything but that's not how society works. People must be held responsible for their actions and lending money to a bank is one such action. Anything else means everyone's paying paying the bill every single time some banker's "safe investments" cause an economic crisis.

Why the hell doesn't the government come running to bail us out when we lose money? I want special banker privileges too. Maybe the government should bail out Tether as well and put an end to those "unbacked" concerns. It's for the best, right?