To complete the circle on what should be a minmim as Genghis proposes, one must understand who is regulating/imposing it. If the proposal is to self administer, it becomes good guidance. The problem with guidance is that sometimes the people who should most follow it, are least likely to.
It is important to consider who takes the risk, if the pilot does not meet the minimum skill set for the task they have to perform. First and always, the pilot takes the risk, then the passengers, aircraft owner, insurer, then at a distance, third parties. In the long shot, the government who regulates, and the general reputation of aviation.
All of these parties have something to loose of the pilots gets it really wrong. So it would appear that those parties, somewhat in the order I have presented, hold the interest in pilot currency - pilot foremost!
In Canada we have a very modest annual recurrency requirement, which is a prerequisite to flying. It can be nothing more that a self study refresher test, which you complete open book, and keep on file, should you be challenged for it. It's a minimum for sure.
It is not reasonable for some pilots, to attempt to inforce hours of piloting per calendar period, prior to acting as PIC. Every floatplane pilot in Canada could have a problem come spring time! Similarly, for some of us, checkouts are not available - "there's to plane, go fly it". So we review what we can (flight manual) and go. At those times, lots of extra vigilence is very wise!
THough I have not seen insurance companies "regulate" numbers, I know that I have been asked to sign letters to them, verifying time I have flown with other pilots in support of their being insured PIC. I know that after an accident, the insurance companies are known to ask for logbooks!
As for stalls, I support the idea of an expectation of currency with stalls, and here's why:
If a pilot is uncomfortable in the stall, how is that pilot in the flare, when spactial orientation and precision are much more vital? We first learn how to fly a plane, then where to fly it. If the how of stalling any particular aircraft is a fading skill, the where during a stall is really in trouble! How's that going to work out when you have to stretch a glide over a stone fence on a forced approach?
During a flight test, I stalled the aircraft, as was breifed prior to takeoff. The safety pilot reacted with unease, and the whole event did not go well. I was later told by his cheif pilot that his pilot should never have allowed me to stall the plane, and that a stall was an "emergency situation" for that operator. I had certification requirments to demonstrate for that aircraft, and I had simply not been flying with the best choice of pilot for that aircraft. That happens....
Genghis' numbers are certainly a great objective to strive for, and would be ideal as a personal measure, but are probaby too optimistic for some pilots to achieve. Those pilots need to know that they are at the lower level of recency, and choose their flying conditions accordingly.