Hacker News Reader

Comment by gtsnexp | Hacker News Reader

It is not a crazy idea. This bank is significant to the G7, and if the Swiss government does decide to intervene and take control, it doesn't necessarily mean the bank is being rescued. The situation is much more complex than simply equating public losses with private gains. If Switzerland takes over the bank, it will be an unprecedented event in history, and I would bet that it would be beneficial for customers in the medium to long term.

View on HN

It would also depend entirely on your definition of “acquire”.

If the Swiss government takes it over for 1 CHF then it’s entirely possible it’s long term a good deal for the Swiss populace.

You completely forgot about the price of outstanding liabilities. 1 CHF might be way too much to pay.

That’s why I said it’s possible it’s a good deal.

Totally agree with you.

Does your logic apply to every failed bank? If not, why not?

Only systematically important banks. There are even few official definitions for what is systematically important. Both CS and UBS are.

No, it doesn't. It applies to Switzerland.

How does a bank owned by the state ensure the constitutional right given to Swiss citizens to banking secrecy? If you can answer this question in a way in which the government doesn't get banking information it by law shouldn't have, I could maybe see it as good news for customers... otherwise they will just provide a systematically inferior service than other, privately owned, banks in Switzerland.

They’ll just close their eyes of course. They pinky swear!

The whole banking secrecy thing is just another way to hide all of the money laundering, drug money, and tinpot African dictator money these banks have been holding all of these years.

The good news is folks in government are probably pretty implicated in this, so they will probably try to make sure there is a pretty strong partition.

I wish money laundering was impossible... by removing the rest of slavery that is the taxing system.

People would trade many things without being treated like criminals just for doing voluntary exchanges.

States are extremely greedy. I am of the opinion that they should know the less the better abt ur money or whatever.

On top of that look at what the current central banking policies are provoking... come on, it looks designed to empoverish us...

Whatever sort of minimal state you want to look at, who is going to pay for roads and public safety?

At this point banking secrecy must already have become a myth, hasn’t it?

Of course, if you’re the government of an African country trying to get to the accounts of some former strongman that used to rule the country I’m pretty sure that the secrecy is still there, but confronted against more persuasive powers (like the US in the recent past, most probably also the EU and the Swiss national government) I don’t think that said secrecy stands any chance.

There is no banking secrecy to Swiss residents. How the government would collect taxes ? It is not free of charge here.

There is no such thing as a "constitutional right given to Swiss citizens to banking secrecy". Swiss constitution does not provide anything of sort [1]. The "Banking Secret" is defined at art. 47 of the Federal Law on Banking [2] and it has a rather narrow definition.

So there is no such thing as "banking secret" for Swiss residents. Hence even if Credit Suisse is nationalized, it won't change anything for their customers, except perhaps an increase in trust.

[1]: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1999/404/en [2]: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/51/117_121_129/fr#art_47

Reply on news.ycombinator.com