Great, even I can understand the explanations here (I'm not a finance whiz by any means).

I haven't taken a deep dive into the SVB fiasco, but I wonder, out of those depositors tapping their thumbs, how many of those were the likes of Peter Thiel, who has more than enough money to absorb the losses he faced by putting too much money into one bank (I realize that not everybody is going to be Giannis Antetokounmpo and put all their riches into 50 different banks, so maybe it's a rhetorical question).

What protections can we develop as a society that says, "well, no, we won't necessarily cover losses of $10 million. Figure out something else to do with your money, like, give some of it away?"

The net effect of the bailout of SVB was that the FDIC actually insured full deposits, not $250,000.

I guess I understand this from a macro "gotta keep banks solvent" perspective, but the real effect of that is that now, all FDIC-insured banks are informally insured at full deposit, no matter the amount.

I would hope that one of the reactions to this would be a cap of some kind. 5 million? 10? Something. Let Thiel figure out something else to do with his absurd wealth.