I agree with you that the risk of total collapse of the banking system has never been more likely. You are also correct that large cash withdrawals are not as easy as walking into the bank with a grocery bag and saying "here's my account - give me my money". During the government lockups, some banks actually warned depositors that sizable cash withdrawals were to be made by appointment, as they would have to request the cash to be delivered via armored truck. Banks do not hold much cash in their own vaults anymore, and it's been that way for a long time. I did withdraw $10k during that time and the branch where I made the withdrawal did have the cash on hand immediately. The teller explained to me that since that particular bank handled a lot of "cash" business accounts, like parking lots, laundromats, et cetera, that branch was usually flush with cash. But that may not be the case for every bank, or even for every branch of a particular bank.

As you have mentioned in the past, this "brink of collapse" has always been there. The whole foundation of the fractional banking system relies upon ony a small fraction of people demanding their cash at the same time. It's been that way from the very beginning. If banks weren't allowed to make loans, there would be no banks. "Putting money right here, on my weight set - you remind me!" - type "banking", is a pipe dream and exists only in Steve Martin's (search it, kids) monologues. Without loans, banks would lose a significant portion of their revenue. Still want a safe place to put all your cash and be able to access it remotely with cards and checks? Sure, banks could still do that, but the fees would be magnitudes higher than they are now.

So why now? This danger has existed since banks existed.

1. Crypto - but not what the media may be telling you. Look up at paragraph #2. What banking services would you desire aside from loans? Security of cash, remote access of same, immediate access to some or all funds 24/7. With paper money (or even gold), you would need a bank or some type of exchange/vault to provide those services. Crypto, however, can provide all of those services without any banking at all. Crypto, if widely adopted, could make banks obsolete. Loans would be handled by "financing companies" (which already exist) which are like "shark tank" on a much smaller level. Currency exchanges? Gone.

2. Governments see this coming and are trying to get ahead of it. You know what I'm talking about - CGDC's (or whatever acronym you choose to use). They're here already. Government will use crypto to snatch victory from the loss of their precious banking system, by ramping up their control to literally every cent in the world. One world currency. One oligarchy to manage it and program it in any way it chooses. Banking system? Ha! The guys that thought that up were small-minded! CGDC will be the tool of total world domination, even down to the poorest soul.

I believe that this fear of "runs on the bank" are simply another wave of psy-op. The governments WANT to destroy the banking system, because they already have a better control system in place. I've heard "experts" say "we don't need regional banks anymore" and "we all may as well directly bank with the Fed". Beware. These are the Faucis of banking, directing you straight to the slaughter pen.

The real battle is whether crypto can survive a government assault on crypto outside of CGDCs. That should be the focus. Is BTC truly unassailable? XMR? I don't know enough about crypto to say. But that will be the final battle. The governments are trying to scare everyone away from crypto while they destroy the banking system, leaving CGDC as the only alternative.

Good luck crypto! Its you or eternal totalitarianism.