Banks need WAY more than 6-10% capital. 

We are hearing the bankers, regulators, and lobbyists deciding where in the 6-10% range the banks should be to be "competitive". But historically speaking the rate should be more like 20%. The banks will argue that they don't need more than 10% because of modern safety mechanisms such as FDIC insurance and federal reserve intervention. But why we should we purposefully concede the need for government insurance in the future. This is absurd.

The burning question is how much is needed so the financial crisis cannot happen again. Great strides have been taken on the underwriting standards for borrowers. But many banks are sill relying on accounting gimmicks such as 'mark to market'. They are also squandering income on bonus and dividends. We believe that at a minimum, the equity-to-total-assets ratio should be 12%, and at least a 20% equity-to-risk-weighted-asset ratio. And this should be done immediately in lieu of paying dividends or these out-sized bonus schemes.

Otherwise, expect the taxpayer to get hit with more bailouts. As you can see in chart 4, the non-performing loan ration went well above 20% in the last crisis. What if there was also a simultaneous currency crisis?