Speaking of private markets, they should have bid higher. Instead the government won and will likely come out ahead with their arrangement. No taxpayer money is being spent.
Sounds like you’re just bitter about tech/biotech companies surviving?
You still think that's true? Clearly it is a risk. And that risk can and should be managed. Even now!
There is no law that says the FDIC has to pay uninsured depositors of the next failed bank.
What if you banked with one of the last several failed banks that no one heard of or cared about?
You think no companies split their funds among several banks and short-term US treasury instruments?
Those companies didn't worry about closing this weekend.
If you can consider that perspective, think about the activities we want to incentivize vs disincentivize in helping us decide when we _should_ reshape that tool.
Are simple bank deposits really something we want people to feel shaky about now and in the future??
There is a strong argument for "yes": it will cause people to consider their (now extant) alternatives and some fraction of those people will choose something else, loosening the stranglehold that retail banking has on routine business transactions.
Or Ether. Or DAI. Or USDC if that's your risk appetite (the diversification of the storage of which is abstracted away already, as you will note it has regained its peg before SVB even reopened under FDIC management). Or a lot of other choices that present themselves.