Replace "too big" with "too costly" and forget that your politicians want you to think this has anything to do with banks.
Between housing costs, education costs, health care costs, child-raising costs, the *cost of failure* for the median American salary-earner is tremendous specifically in consideration of the lagging potential secondary wage source back-up.
As an example,
Growing up in a moderate-to-lower income family in a small house on the outskirts of town, I know first hand that two decades ago, the loss of a primary income could be mitigated by a *single* less-than-optimal job and still maintain a family-centric lifestyle in a middle-class, Catholic town until a full-potential job could be found.
-Today, that same house is priced multiples beyond what a middle-class family could afford, particularly on a single income. And given a loss of income, that ability to maintain payments drops significantly. *The margin-of-failure that has been baked-into our society is huge * + " is ridiculously understated by the markets and the Federal Reserve".
I don't care about GDP or the S&P, the only metric that matters as to reasonably approximate a better, happier society is median individual income net-of-taxes -to- cost of living. The only second metric thereafter would involve "median back-up income" and I don't believe this secondary salary is nearly as robust as it should be at this stage of what many consider a recovery.
I love financial market crashes - they are a reflection of reality slamming into the horde of untruths and illusions and lies.
Finally,
Rampant liberalism is gutting the American middle class by acting opposite to the problems discussed above: creating policies that stagnate median wages and increase cost of living under the guise of "helping".