Ackermann was upset by the guidelines set forth at the G-20 meeting that would regulate banking activities in the G-20 nations. He went on to say: " We need to start again with an intensive dialog between the private sector and public sector on strategic questions, on technical details, including what is the economic price of certain things we are doing."

The argument by Ackermann makes no sense whatsoever. Here we had a world banking system on brink of chaos and he wants to stop regulation. Sure, banks would be unable to continue taking excessive risk, taking enormous bonuses, leveraging their capital to the point where central governments had to step in and spend trillions of dollars worldwide to bail them out, throwing millions of people into unemployment, bringing world trade to a virtual standstill, putting major industries at risk, collapsing the stock markets throughout the globe with trillions of dollars of paper losses, not to mention the human cost of all this greed.

Yes, the effect of regulation is that bankers will have to tighten their belts, there may be no bonuses, and they will need to use more common sense in their transactions. That certainly will not hurt world economies; just the opposite, it will strengthen them, for it is trust in our financial institutions that is needed. Without it, the world will sink back into chaos.

Do you agree that we need strict bank regulations?