US anti-Russia sanctions killed my business

25 points by behindai ↗ HN
I am not a Russian citizen, but I had my IT projects aimed at Russian speakers. Yesterday I've noticed that Stripe declines all transactions from cards issued in Russian Federation and Belarus. My business has been killed.

39 comments

[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 82.7 ms ] thread
And that really sucks. You have my sympathy.

However, these sanctions are being enacted to stop more PEOPLE from being killed. Dead businesses are unfortunate, but acceptable collateral damage compared to human life.

I don't understand how my dead business can help to stop more PEOPLE from being killed.
Your dead business isn't helping stop people from being killed. It's collateral damage from the sactions, but those sanctions ARE helping to put an end to this madness.

I realize that this is cold comfort as the business you've put so much work into has now died for reasons outside of your control, and that's a really shitty situation to find yourself in. This is a black swan event. Your business acumen is not in doubt. You have no fault in this.

> those sanctions ARE helping to put an end to this madness

It's this part that seems not very well supported. From what I can tell, Russia thought about the probable sanctions quite a lot before starting this course of action, so it's not clear to me that sanctions are going to have much effect. Even if sanctions generally were accomplishing something, it's not clear to me that these particular sanctions are doing anything useful.

It kind of seems like more Great Reset stuff, i.e., claim that something useful is being done while being incredibly disruptive in ways that destroy small businesses.

I do feel like sanctions should better target large institutions. So you won’t cut off Gazprom but you’ll stop some average citizen from running their business, or in the case of Namecheap, stop them from registering a domain name? It’s like, we just don’t get it.
In ideal conditions we could do that, but the world is messy. There are many competing forces that need to be balanced, and it almost always can't be done without some blowback or collateral damage or compromise.

So we take a pragmatic approach based on our best information at the time, and as quickly as possible. How do you stop a dictator with the world's largest arsenal of nukes from engaging in a 19th century style land grab without destroying the world political order, world economies, and perhaps even the world itself? Now how do you do it without creating a power vacuum?

It's easy to stand back observing the results and criticize in hindsight (and believe me, we'll get plenty of that in a few months), but right now people need to make quick and possibly inefficient decisions using whatever information they can gather because the consequences are so grave.

That sounds like it could also have been written to justify Japanese internment in WWII. Maybe hindsight buys us some luxuries we couldn't otherwise afford, but it's worth some hard thinking about what is really necessary.
If we want to go down that road to its logical conclusion, anything could be written to justify anything.

But such argumentation is fruitless.

If sanctions worked really well, that position could be justifiable.

In practice, sanctions rarely if ever seem to cause violent revolution. They just end up hurting the little guys who can't do anything anyway, whilst the most well connected work around them anyway. See how North Korea has Apple computers ... for the leadership.

> In practice, sanctions rarely if ever seem to cause violent revolution.

Sanctions aren't supposed to cause violent revolution, particularly.

They are supposed to:

(1) Pressure the regime to change the course of action which caused them, and

(2) Reduce the economic capacity behind, and this the effectiveness of, the targeted action so long as #1 doesn't work.

Promoting violent overthrow of the regime is a manner of achieving #1, but while it is often an acceptable outcome from sanctions, it's generally not the preferred outcome.

> They just end up hurting the little guys who can't do anything anyway

All, even the most autocratic, regimes rely entirely on the at least tacit cooperation of “the little guy” to function at all.

Do you not consider Stripe a "large institution?" If Stripe allows these payments to process, they are a large institution profiting on fees despite the sanctions.
>It's collateral damage from the sanctions, but those sanctions ARE helping to put an end to this madness.

We can hope that this is the case, but we certainly don't know. We don't have knowledge of the future or alternative timelines. It is entirely possible that they are making the situation worse, the conflict more intense, or could lead to future Wars or nuclear annihilation.

This is the gamble that we are taking, perhaps a calculated gamble but a gamble nonetheless.

Anyone who says that they know for a fact what will happen is a liar

Has as much proof as that lockdowns and masks help.
That's the hope, but it also feels a lot like Germany after WWI. Sometimes cutting countries off from your sphere of influence and being overly harsh just ends up radicalizing people more. It's strange to me how little discussion this seems to warrant from people.
Strange: reading your comment I expected after the first line that you try to remind us of the annexation by Germany of part Czechoslovakia BEFORE WWII.
Not really. Sending sanctions towards ordinary Russians and sending javelins/stingers to Ukraine will only give you the following outcome:

1 - People who hates Putin regime still hates them, maybe a bit more, not much to gain here;

2 - People who likes Putin will hate you, again not much to lose here;

3 - People in the middle might hate Putin, but will definitely hate you more because you DIRECTLY hit them;

4 - Sending javelins/stingers to Ukraine will NOT stop Russian troops, but only to inflict more damage to them and at the same time make siege much more bloodier. It will just prolong the conflict with net lose on ordinary Ukraine citizen's side. Ukraine is still going to lose (and at the same time lost more human lives) anyway. The fantasy of "ordinary citizen taking urban guerilla warfare and driving enemies out" only works in games, unfortunately.

5 - If western countries REALLY want to minimize the damage to ordinary citizens, there are two feasible ways, one is to send in peace keeping troops including Air force and play a strong face to Putin. To avoid conflict with advancing Russian army a no-fly zone can be setup in Western Ukraine to accept refugees. The second way is to push the Ukraine army to let ordinary people to flee, not to keep them in the city.

I can't interpret your statements as anything else than oversimplified (almost to a primitive level) criticism of the attempt of civilized countries to stop a barbaric attack being openly continuation of earlier attack not treated appropriately when it was the proper time for it.
It is not really an attempt to stop the attack, but to prolong it (mostly regarding the stingers/javelins not the sactions), sadly. The only way to stop it is to send in troops to the western part before Russia grabs them.
(comment deleted)
I'm sorry to hear this.

When I worked in manufacturing environments, especially defense related ones, we had policies in place to ensure the reliability of our supply chain, but we didn't have anything in place to verify the reliability of our clients (other than credit, obviously). For example, we would verify the country of origin for purchased materials, but we never tracked where the final products wound up.

It is an interesting problem for sure. At least you can be flattered knowing that your work is being used as incentive; a weapon... and that it's working.

Political gamble. Like all gambles they can pay big or not. It’s not like the world situation for the last 5-10 years makes Ukraine a surprise. If you want to minimize risk, don’t buy junk bonds…
Putin killed your business, and I'm sympathetic to that and it sucks for you that your business has become a casualty of economic warfare.
I, as I am sure is most of HN, is saddened to hear of your loss

However, as others have pointed-out, this isn't about YOU - this is about a nation-state unilaterally deciding that it should attempt to DESTROY a neighbor for the sake of a few natural resources and a slightly larger buffer between it and other [what its leader thinks are] "enemy"/"hostile" nations

>this is about a nation-state unilaterally deciding that it should attempt to DESTROY a neighbor for the sake of a few natural resources

When did this become about America? /s

I find it funny, as a Muslim, to see how little discussion there is on this issue. As opposed to the middle east, where even drone strikes killing civilians are justified and made to seem like a very complicated issue with no simple solution. Everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others it seems

International trade is risky.

More so if you're trading with a rogue nation led by a criminal.

Can you adapt the products to other languages/regions? It could go a long way towards diversifying your sources of income. The sanctions won't last forever anyways, meaning there's a good chance that investment could pay off in the end.
>You have my condolences for being a victim of all this ridiculous posturing and virtue signaling.

It ain't virtue signaling when the Treasury Department blocks all transactions related to your business. So please stop with the alt-right bs talking points, we're in the prelude to a world war it's not time for getting mad at businesses who are literally not able to transact at all (Stripe is in the same boat here as many other firms due to the EO).

That sucks but your target market just closed every business in Ukraine.
"Killing" your business (actually, at the end of the war your customers will be back; hopefully you can coast on without income and with reduced costs) is not only collateral damage but part of the sanctions: it hurts Russian citizens and businesses, and their friends.
I think this overly trivializes the posters situation without reason, but the end point is correct.

Maybe the business is dead, maybe they will lose their home, and maybe their life's work. This will certainly happen to countless people.

The point of Broad and durable sanctions is often too simply hurt the lives of citizens and pressure or weaken the government.

Would it be possible for you to contact your customers and agree on a credit system? No finances being moved (because of the war) but you'll keep a track of their charges and after the war settle up. This will be difficult on your side, but if you have access to a business loan will allow you to entirely withstand the sanctions at only a ~8-14% loss if the war lasts an entire year. ~1-2% if only a few months.

Sad news, but in perspective this will always happen. It's one reason why businesses have so much interest in what their government is doing.

Pivot to Ukrainian speakers.

Also, don't invest in non-democracies. You took a big gamble.

Russian speakers aren't just in russia
Sorry you are in an authoritative country (Internet). But it's the best we have found yet.
Dude just build your own internet.
(comment deleted)