The practice of robbing banks at gunpoint turns out to be not that lucrative. The very best of that kind of bank robber averages only four heists before getting caught. On average, each participant in that kind of robbery nets only about $4,000 per hold up. That is only $16,000 before going to prison. That is too paltry of an income given the enormous risk and the certainty of getting caught. Picking up aluminum cans or begging with a sign on a street corner has a higher return.
Now when banks rob people, their profits are astronomical. Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has assisted banks as they go about robbing the general population. This has been the goal of the quantitative easing initiatives going back to TARP and all of the programs that have followed. The most profitable method of committing a crime is to partner up with government. After that crimes become legal and meaningful laws are not enforced. There is a downside for banks in using the cover of government to rob people. It is like killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. Banks have robbed the general population to the extent that there is no way now to keep the economy from sliding backwards and in this banks end up suffering right along with everyone else. Of course financial institutions have made so much in the run up, it has to have been worth it to them regardless of the negative end result.
There are two different kinds of bank robbers. There are the kind like John Dillinger was and then there are banks that do the robbing. The best kind of bank robber to be is the bank that robs ordinary people.