Why should large banks be broken up to prevent financial corruption

The article says to break up the banks is "political demagoguery" and "embraces a dubious 'too big to fail' doctrine " It's a bunch of baloney The "too big to fail" doctrine was created by the banks themselves in their lobbying to deregulate the financial system It's the opposite of "dubious " It was one of the biggest lies ever told by the bankers They made it up to get the Congress and the President to repeal the New Deal system of regulation The repeal of Glass-Steagall was the most important of the deregulations that the banks pushed for It allowed the banks to create the most destructive financial crisis in history, which they then used as an excuse to get the government to bail them out That's why they lied and said they were "too big to fail " The banks are not now, nor were they then, "too big to fail " They were too big and too politically powerful to be held accountable for the damage they did The government would have had no problem breaking them up and letting them go bankrupt That's what it did in the 1980s when it broke up AT&T The government has no problem breaking up companies for far less damage than the banks did For example, it took apart Enron for a tiny fraction of the damage caused by the banks What the banks want is to be "too big to jail " That's what the "too big to fail" doctrine is all about It's not "dubious " It's pure evil It is so evil that the government went along with it and made it the official policy of the United States President Obama, who could have done something about this when he was elected, instead gave his blessing to the banks by appointing as his Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, who was one of the people who created the "too big to fail" doctrine while he was working at the NY Fed The media has been part of the conspiracy While the banks have been getting more and more concentrated, the media has been promoting the lie that they are not The New York Times is the most to blame It has a huge amount of influence It could have changed the course of history But instead it has chosen to help cover up for the banks