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

Money laundering = disguising the path money takes. These transactions are extremely traceable.

It is equally ridiculous to propose the goal is to get money out of Russia. How does investing in startups make that any easier? If the money can get to a startup in the US, ipso facto it can get out of Russia, to any other investment.

I would not be surprised to see such an obviously mistaken comment upvoted on reddit, but it is an alarming sign to see it happening here.



> Money laundering = disguising the path money takes.

indeed.

> These transactions are extremely traceable.

Sure they are.

But the source of the original fortune behind all this is pretty murky and money laundering does not stop at the first stage.

Think of it as onion routing, going further and further into the legitimate world until those that handle the money have no way of proving or even knowing that the original source wasn't legit. It's all about provenance.

> It is equally ridiculous to propose the goal is to get money out of Russia.

Are you familiar with the name Berezovsky?

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Berezovsky_%28businessman... )

You can go down as fast as up in Russia, and it doesn't take all that much to cause a fall from grace.

Spreading your assets in multiple countries seems like a good idea in an environment that volatile.

> How does investing in startups make that any easier?

It's a great way to ensure yourself future income and influence, surely one or more of them will pay back big time.

> If the money can get to a startup in the US, ipso facto it can get out of Russia, to any other investment.

Sure, but that won't get you in on the ground floor of a bunch of companies that will likely be very important in the near future. The return on investment in terms of influence could be enormous, it's a risk worth taking.

Better than buying standard oil or microsoft for an equivalent amount of money.

And if it is monopoly money to them anyway, why not buy that nearly free lottery ticket?


The point is that these money already laundered, most likely it's just basic deversification.


Moreover, you "launder" the proceeds of a numbers racket or a heroin dealing ring. When you control over 1/10th of the metals industry in one of the world's largest industrialized nations, you don't "launder" the proceeds; you create banks to hold the money.

The "money laundering" charge does a disservice to any legitimate qualms one might have about Oligarchy funds.


When Soviet Russia imploded in the former USSR and in lots of satellite states huge amounts of state owned real estate and means of production changed hands for peanuts.

It was probably the largest theft in our lifetime and whether you call eventually turning that into assets in western countries laundering or not is arguing semantics.

Ill gotten gains get converted into more diversified and more respectable assets.

Basically these men (and their predecessors) stole a country, the fact that that gives them access to mechanisms that ordinary criminals can not afford does not place them morally above them at all in my opinion.

This period is sometimes referred to as the rape of Russia, but that makes it sound like it is over, which is far from the truth.


Exactly. The real question is whether it is a difference in type or a difference in scale. "Laundering" may be a dirty word used to make things untracable, but it is equally possible to do unseemly things so well that no one can call you to account. If so, you do not need to launder your money -- but the question remains as to whether or not what you are doing qualifies as a difference in type.


I would not be surprised to see such an obviously mistaken comment upvoted on reddit, but it is an alarming sign to see it happening here.

This comment implies you peek at the number of points a comment gets before responding. Do you?


Well, we don't know if it's upvoted since we don't see the score.


I think, what 0x12 is trying to say, that highly-leveraged investments are a great way to launder money: i.e. you may have only 10% in "clean" money, leveraged 10:1 to cover over 90% of "dirty" money.

I don't think this is the case with DST. This is just a usual case of envy.

I'll take DST money any day. Hell, I'll give 10% of my company to Yuri Milner, any day, even without the investment (this is not a legally binding promise).


One may think, that early bet on Facebook is not a per-say highly-leveraged, because it must be paid in full cash.

In practice it's such a risky investment, so it should be considered more like an option or outright gamble.




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

Search: