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

I have a gentle rule, which is when discussing (geo)politics with friends, we should try not to use Switzerland as an example. It's just too good, too rational, too sensible, too well run, in myriad ways that other countries should be able to emulate, but consistently and constantly don't.
 help



I have a gentle rule, which is "if you can do it in one place, it is probably possible to do it in a second". The Swiss are not a separate species.

There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in a enormous, diverse country.

If my house were a country, I'd be in the top 0.1% of household internet speeds compared to other countries. Obviously everyone should be just like me!


> There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in a enormous, diverse country.

The US is a large collection of a whole bunch of rich (by global standards), tiny, fairly homogenous areas. We manage roads and schools at state, county, and local levels; we could do municipal broadband.


The difficulties of American internet speeds have little to do with the total size of the country, but how far individual families are from each other. Spain is roughly the size of Texas, and Spain has a higher population, but you need a lot less fiber to each home, because metro areas are so much denser, and therefore it's so much easier to lay the fiber.

As usual, blame the suburbs, which make all kinds of infrastructure quite a bit more expensive per capita.


But the US has long lagged behind in even dense areas. It's more than just the distribution.

Right. It’s things like Baltimore (when I lived there) requiring that high speed internet had to roll out in poor areas first, before it could go into the rich neighborhoods.

But this was the early 2000s and the internet was still “new”. Only the richer areas cared and were willing to pay the price. Letting them have first (or even equal!) access would have made it easier to fund the rollout in low income areas.


Huge swaths of our densest metro areas, in our largest cities, do not have any fiber option, just one cable provider.

The NEC, which is the only area of the US that really has any density to speak of, does have pretty good fiber penetration.

https://www.reviews.org/app/uploads/2024/11/Verizon-Fios-cov...


> There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in an enormous, diverse country.

US states are little islands entirely capable of doing things like building infrastructure. There is no excuse for our states and their lack of movement, certainly not “the entire country is just tooooo big. whoa is us.” nonsense.


Yes, that's true for population.

But all except 9 US states are larger in geographic area and only 5 have a higher population density.

Those are pretty salient statistics when you're talking about infrastructure that links houses.


Does New York have great home fiber infrastructure?

Rich is a key attribute here. Tiny, not really. The key is dense. That makes terrestrial connections cheaper. A country with the population of the US and the richness and density of Switzerland would be just as capable of building out high speed internet connections. It would have ~38x the population of Switzerland, cost ~38x more to wire, and have ~38x the resources with which to do it.

Incidentally, the northeast of the US has a similar or greater population density as Switzerland and is pretty rich. That area, at least, should be as capable of this sort of thing. Doing it for, say, everybody in Alaska would be a bit tougher.

I don't know what diversity has to do with anything here. As far as I've seen, people from all sorts of different places and cultures seem to like high speed internet about equally well.


Infrastructure is laughable in northeast. And no, we do not have competition here in NJ. Yay "free market"

>homogenous country

Tell me you know nothing about Switzerland without telling me you know nothing about Switzerland. Try asking a German Swiss what they think about a French Swiss or either about the Romansch.


So one would think.

And yet, living in Switzerland after the UK involved one after another discovery of how well-ordered and -run a country could be. And then moving to Germany was like stepping back even further behind my memories of the UK.

I'm sure you could find examples of countries that do specific things as well as Switzerland; but I'm not aware of many places that do almost everything so excellently. (Maybe Japan, in many respects, but I lack sufficient direct experience to adequately judge.)


> I'm not aware of many places that do almost everything so excellently

Probably Singapore, which is sometimes described as the Switzerland of Asia anyway. 10 Gb symmetric fibre is broadly available at around SGD $50/month (about 35 EUR).


This is not to say that it isn't well run, but I think it would be fair to mention that Singapore is one of the most densely populated countries on Earth (#3 overall; #1 among countries with population >1 million.)

Separately, I am not totally sure just how widely deployed FTTH is in Switzerland. Here in Zürich it's everywhere, but zooming in on some rural place on init7's map tells quite a different story (perhaps not surprisingly).

https://ftth.init7.net


I don't doubt there are differences.

I doubt they're insurmountable. Again, because the Swiss aren't some genetically superior subspecies. Culture can be changed.

I see Americans talk about how impossible universal healthcare is as if the rest of the developed world hasn't largely figured it out.


Nothing is insurmountable; however each one of us must play within the practical constraints of our local geographies (political, social, financial and physical). The parent comment probably means that Switzerland is in a positive on all axes unlike the rest of the world.

It’s politics. Boil most things down and the technical is inconsequential when compared to the politics.

Look at the political system of Switzerland and you will see a radically different setup.

And I think that’s the horse. The rest is cart. Yes they are rich but why? Yes they are relatively stable socially but why? Decentralised Canton government structure + direct democracy (referendums all the time for things that matter). That, I think, is why all the rest.


I think there's more to it than that.

From a philosophical perspective, I love the cantonal/direct democracy model. But it's supported by a strong culture of awareness of current affairs, and involvement in the political process. (Of course, these two aspects are likely strongly synergistic.)

However, I'm not sure this unique political structure explains the trains running on time, the sensible choices made about the internet structure (per the article), the top-of-the-world healthcare system, the Swiss cheese science institute, or many other aspects of the broader country. It may partly explain the routinely excellent government bureaucracy (say that with a straight face anywhere else!), the convenient and reliable local public transport options, and the local police being well-resourced to the point of apparent boredom.


Heh, you were walking right up to my viewpoint and then turned away. A parliamentary democracy with proportional representation has way more influence IMO, and you'll find another couple of relatively well-run countries that work like that.

For me, this is the point of the article. People fought and the best decision was the result. And I suspect there's a fundamental cultural difference that makes the fight much less fair in America.

Been an American my entire life. 45+ years. I've never heard a single person say that universal healthcare is "impossible".

I'm an American and I've heard it often, usually with a bunch of strange excuses. We're too big, we're too diverse, there's too many states, and on. None of those actually make very much sense, but I've heard it all for why universal healthcare could never work in the US.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-not...

> President Donald Trump on Wednesday said it’s “not possible” for the federal government to fund Medicare, Medicaid and child care costs, arguing that it should be up to the states to “take care” of those programs while the federal government focuses on military spending.


I guess I'm pretty confused on what your point is here?

Universal Healthcare would be a new program in the US that would see a drastic tax increase, in that our healthcare spending currently going to insurance companies would instead go to a new federal agency. The amount of money companies and citizens spend on it may or may not also increase, but your quote has basically nothing to do with that.


That’s sleight of hand. “Ooooh! A tax increase! Scary!”

If I can pay $100 in tax to save $200 in premiums and copays, that’s a win. The US is an extreme outlier in healthcare spend.


We must live on opposite sides of US cause I’ve never heard anyone say that it is possible (except few politicans who thought it may be a good way to win an election but also knew that it was not possible and gave up once they got elected)

Well and a little bit of research, tells me it’s far from universal across Switzerland. This article is so provable false in many of its premises it’s worthless - see my other comment.

It's also too tiny to be representative of most of humanity

Switzerland has a population larger than all but ~11 US states.

It's got 9m people. The US has 30x the people and 250x the space. It's not comparable.

So why do we struggle to get the infrastructure to work in dense urban areas still? Or even just “not Wyoming”?

Switzerland and California have the same population density. Why can’t CA build high speed rail?


Just for the information Switzerland neither does ;)

CA’s high speed rail isn’t high speed by European standards and it looks on the way to cancelation or significant curtailment. We can’t even manage what y’all would consider slow rail.

I don't know but Swiss isn't the only train system that works but also Spain, Italy, France. Poland has a growing better train system . The swiss system has it's advantages but it is also very expensive.

It might also worth it to check them out


I’ve ridden on several.

“Others do it even better and cheaper” makes the US failure to build and maintain infrastructure like this even sadder.


What is this supposed to imply? us states are also a poor representation of humanity. This matters a great deal: switzerland is notoriously ethnically homogenous and unable to get along with anyone. Life on easy mode!

It implies that Switzerland is by no means so tiny their lessons learned can't apply to other multi-million human sized regions.

Switzerland gets along with others just fine, to the point where Italy and France used to handle their air defense on the weekends (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_702).

> The Swiss Air Force did not respond because the incident occurred outside normal office hours; a Swiss Air Force spokesman stated: "Switzerland cannot intervene because its airbases are closed at night and on the weekend. It's a question of budget and staffing." Switzerland relies on neighboring countries to police its airspace outside of regular business hours; the French and Italian Air Forces have permission to escort suspicious flights into Swiss airspace, but do not have authority to shoot down an aircraft over Switzerland.


Try 500 mil and you'll see china is the only interesting sample.

If the swiss were able to get along with others, they wouldn't have such a reputation as racist nazis


China is, as the EU (450M), US (340M), and Switzerland are, broken into smaller subunits for local and regional government.

There's only two countries with over 500 million people and they're complete freak outliers.

"unable to get along with anyone" is an interesting claim given that the last armed conflict in Switzerland was in 1847 (Sonderbund War).

you going for the cherry-picked-but-functionally-meaningless statistic of the week award?

I'm going for the "Switzerland isn't a little village of 50 people, we can learn lessons from them just fine" award.

Every large country breaks things up into small chunks. No one says Vermont can't handle a school system just because it's small.


Switzerland and Japan should be excluded in most discussions - what they can do has little bearing on “the real world” ;)

And Iceland.

Lets just exclude the best example, as everyone knows, we should never try to be the best. Being the best is dumb, liberal and possibly communist. Settling for 105th, that's freedom and democracy baby.



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

Search: