I think if you had strict regulations on certain aspects,housing crashes would not happen as much. It was the banks fault that the housing crash destroyed the market. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac didn't help,but its mainly on the banks in this crash. They overvalued and gave loans to everyone. The crash ruined America.
With the exception of actually showing people their true bank statements. That and they let people know they are going to be raising their prices. Other than that they seem to still be taking the same old risks by investing other peoples money into things they do not want. The stock market is through the roof and it happened rather quickly. It makes you wonder how long this can go on before something happens again.
It has become clear that the relentless unregulation of the markets has caused the economy to falter and people to lose their jobs and livelihoods, while the banks in control earn higher profits and pay themselves off with higher bonuses. Nobody should be rewarded for doing their job incorrectly and behaving criminally.
Banks, first and foremost, are private run entities. They are not a government run service and they shouldn't be treated as such. Consumers can choose whether or not they want to pay the fees and abide by the rules laid out by the banks or they could choose to not use a bank at all. There are already a multitude of rules the banks must abide by in order to keep their charter and I don't think adding any additional regulations will do anything except raise service fees for consumers.
No, banks should not have more regulations. The regulators of banks are almost entirely composed of former bank officials, and write laws that can be expertly subverted by huge national banks. Banks have the connections, money, and time to influence legislation and use loopholes in the laws that get passed. These regulations would only really effect private individuals and smaller banks without the clout to avoid the regulations.