And they SHOULD let their banks suffer the consequences of bad decisions.
That's the only way a bank will learn to properly weigh benefits versus risks. If they get bailed out whenever a bad risk blows up, they won't learn to avoid or charge rates appropriate to the level of risk.
And depositors should also think twice about where they put their money.
If we want banks that don't default, we should have banks that only issue mortgages for less than 80% of a home's pre-bubble price. Let the buyer or another lender be on the hook for the risky part of the loan.
And if this bank fails, let its assets be turned over to a corporation owned by all the depositors, whose shares they can buy and sell. There's no reason to make the taxpayers pay to recapitalize the bank and keep the unwise bankers in business.
If there's a demand for that level of risk and the low rates it pays, that will solve the problem who want that level of security.
But we want to be insulated from risks and have them spread around to other people when dumb investments blow up. So even wise investors are stuck paying the costs. And we DO eventually have to face these costs despite all the borrowing and money creation we do to paper them over.