> People are upset that time after time the rich make blunder after blunder after blunder and time after time are protected from their own idiocy and hubris in circumstances where everyone else would be left to rot.
I actually think this has created a precedent that will protect deposits of over $250k at small banks. Which is not the domain of poor people, but also not necessarily that of billionaires. So this whole fiasco has created protections that more-or-less ordinary people may well benefit from.
Plus, although $250k is a lot for an individual, it isn't necessarily a ton for a business. For example, I once encountered a small software company of about four people, funded by "friends and family" investors (mostly immigrants), that had about $500k in the bank. The employees were solidly middle-class, and the founder was maybe on par with your typical dentist.
So I don't view this as only a bailout for billionaires, because I think bank failures can affect anyone with a little money.
However, I will grant you -- or volunteer -- the following comparison: Compare this rescue, to what hasn't been done for the residents of East Palestine. That situation is a little different, because the railroad can surely pay for it, so there's no need to consider passing any liability through, say (by analogy) to the railroad industry as a whole. If the executive and judicial branches had been as swift to act in that case as the FDIC, Fed, and Treasury have been in this case, then the people of East Palestine would have been evacuated immediately to comfortable digs, their houses bought for their pre-accident market value, and Norfolk Southern sued to pay for it all.
So while I think the right thing was done in this case, and think it will even benefit fairly-ordinary members of the upper-middle-class, I will grant you that the little guys too often do get steamrolled.