It's not punishment. You know that when you put your money in a bank there's a change you won't get it back. That's why you're supposed to pick a bank you're okay with.
That's how it is with everything. If a farmer plants some crops but it drops in price to the point it's completely unprofitable, is he being punished for growing food? Does the government bail him out?
That's not a great analogy. The farmer is the bank in our case, and yes, it is going under. It should. The question is, should all these local grocers go under too because they had exclusive relationships with that farmer? Some would say yes, they should have diversified their base of farmers. I've learned that "insured sweep accounts" are something that should be used by startups to insure them for more than 250k.
That's how it is with everything. If a farmer plants some crops but it drops in price to the point it's completely unprofitable, is he being punished for growing food? Does the government bail him out?