Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This comment feels like it’s more directed at the comment above mine than mine.

I’m not implying that is where Swiss neutrality comes from, more making a counter point that IF they are staying neutral (currently) to protect fortunes then it’s not just to protect Russians.

I wasn’t making a statement about its history. Banking in Switzerland I realize is fairly recent. I am not even saying that’s definitely what they are currently doing.



Your initial assertion that Swiss is neutral to make money is not accurate. Historically it was to prevent casualties in wars between France and... whoever else. This has enabled it to be the bank of anyone trying to escape prying eyes - but that is a byproduct of their neutrality; not the purpose of it.


> This has enabled it to be the bank of anyone trying to escape prying eyes - but that is a byproduct of their neutrality; not the purpose of it.

It's been some correlation between "neutrality" and "money" for centuries. They go hand in hand.

Sometimes it's really hard to tell the effect from the cause.

Also, it's easy to imagine "Neutrality brings us moneys! Let's stick with it.". Not saying if it's 100% true, of course.


> I's been some correlation between "neutrality" and "money" for centuries.

You state still this falsehoods after I pointed out that

* other swiss pecularities (e.g. their banking laws about anonymous number accounts) might be more to blame

* other european neutral countries didn't exhibit any correlation between neutrality and money?

If you talk about correlation, then you need to take in the full data set. You speak general about neutrality, so take in ALL neutral countries. Malta, Ireland, Austria, Liechtenstein. And maybe even neutral microstates like Vatican.

Only THEN can you come to a conclusion. But not by only focusing on one single country, and extrapolating your observation to all of neutrality.


They have anonymous accounts??? Like, fully remote?



I clearly is/was directed at you.

Wasn't it you that stated the hypothesis "neutrality is to appease the rich"?

Can't you see that I tried to refute this hypothesis? But maybe you have arguments to back this hypothesis?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: