Because it goes against the narrative. The narrative is what they're trying to preserve. This is the narrative that says bankers, the ones who were advantaged by the system, must remain at the helm. They don't care, at this point, that this will collapse society if left unchecked; they've made up their minds that the power structure was to remain intact at all costs.
So in order to preserve that, any story - no matter how selective in its look on reality - will do.
The rich haven't made a bobo, That's impossible the rich are the good. They are our betters. We must keep deferring to them.
Let us find poorer people to blame.
And of course, they find them and they become ethe scapegoat because in the world of the conservative, rich men in suits doing business can do no wrong.
This is not something new and exciting in history. It's very old and rehashed stuff: It's called an aristocracy.
And in France, sadly, their aristocracy did not understand the necessity of granting more access to the levers of power until they saw the guillotine.
American conservatism's attitude reminds me very much of that of the French Aristocracy: Deep down, they knew their houses of cards were falling apart, but the thought of a more exclusive society, where (oh, mon Dieu!) peasants may have a say was just too much for them to bear. So they kept on holding to their privileges, powers and tittles to the bitter end.