The too-big-to-fail debate has moved beyond a simple argument over whether banks should be broken up just because of their size. True, the banks have gotten bigger, but there is actually no perfect size that what make it necessarily "safe". The task of breaking up these institutions might have to be on the shareholders, those who suffer from the banks low share price over the past few years. But why would a bank listen to shareholders when regulators have been the main chokehold? And even if shareholders made a move, when would be the right time do so, and what would it be? Still too many questions, as banks continue to grow...