The problem is too much concentrated power in the hands of too few. That allowed them to 'buy' the freedom to do things that cause problems, benefiting them in the short term but screwing the larger society. Look at the bank just recently caught laundering billions for drug cartels and terrorists who faces no criminal charges because the Justice Department says charging them is a danger to the economy.
That's why well-meaning government can pass lots of laws trying to regulate 'insurance' products for financial institutions, and those institutions can then just go invent "CDOs" which are insurance by another name but completely unregulated and reckless and a threat to stability - and it's not that they set out with evil intent but that competititve pressure forces them to do the same.
I remember in the S&L crisis, Home Savings proudly advertised that they were a conservative institution that just did home loans and didn't get involved in all that crap, and so they did just fine - and not long after, all the aggressive financial institution games they didn't do left them uncompetitive and they were acquired by Washington Mutual who did those things. And of course then the games caught up with them and they got acquired by too big to fail Chase.
A Senator said, 'the banks own this place', and he was being honest.
What's needed is for government to invest in significant and skilled regulators to keep the system working well for everyone - and that's prevented when right-wing leaders serving the wealthy interests get too much of the public fooled into an anti-government hatred, largely starting with Ronald Reagan, where the government is just totally outgunned trying to regulate and ends up just serving the big banks.
FDR had the right idea, when he created the SEC, and hired one of the biggest stock market scammers around to become the guy who put a stop to that stuff, who was willing to do it for patriotic reasons, appointing Joe Kennedy (JFK's father) as the first commissioner. A lot of the worst abuses were ended by that. Now it's more about doing some things for looking like you are doing something but not really doing almost anything.
Obama got massive donations from Wall Street in 2008 for a reason and appointed bank-friendly people, and he's the 'better' guy.
His oh so terrible for the big banks creation of the consumer protection agency for banking is just doing some basic crap like requiring clear disclosure of terms, not actually fixing any of the large problems. Under Reagan in the S&L crisis over 1000 bankers went to jail, under Obama not one has. And he's the 'better' guy than the Republicans who would probably give them medals for the scams.
What's needed is the public to get a clue and support politicians who are like Bernie Sanders who would actually fix these problems.
For political reasons, when the big bank bailouts were passed, large sums were also passed to help homeowners - and 90% of the homeowner money never got spent.
As insiders explain, the people doing it just didn't give a crap about the citizens. They'd give massive sums to the banks who caused the problems, but say that it would be wrong to help the homeowners who had taken on loans they couldn't afford, and just not do it.