[Consultant32452]

>By contrast, it seems today people view big banks as a kind of mandatory evil that we should just shut up about and tolerate.

On the contrary, I think the population would LOVE to vote for a President that isn't owned by Goldman Sachs, but there just isn't one. We sort of almost kinda got there with Bernie Sanders, but the establishment wouldn't let that happen.

[tradersam]

Also, 2007-09 showed that the banks are too big to fail. They don't just go away, and they have more resources than anyone to lobby against their strong position going away, so not much we can do besides tolerate and mitigate their influence until a popular idealist get on the ticket.

[Consultant32452]

It's hard to over-estimate the lengths these groups will go to in order to protect their position. We know that our wealthy will convince our government to go to war or overthrow democratically elected leaders in order to protect profits. It will probably take a revolution to unseat them.

[samirillian]

>but the establishment wouldn't let that happen.

It was a lot of factors, I don't think "the establishment" was solely, or even primarily, to blame.

[khc]

s/establishment/votes of the people/