The 347 pages of bank regulations known as Basel II do not contain one single phrase that has anything to do with establishing the purpose of our banks. The regulators, when regulating, should they not start by doing just that? But then again some could hold that the Basel regulations for banks do contain one explicit purpose - that of not having banks fail… as if not failing would be the ultimate and laudable purpose of a financial system? Since 1997 I have been arguing publicly since that if banks do not fail in sufficiently large numbers that just evidences that society is not taking enough risks. But then again some would tell me that the current crisis is clear evidence of too much risk-taking. They’ve got to be joking! Too much risk taking in mortgages, in the US, in AAA rated securities?