Schmidt: Google Once Considered Issuing Currency

itwbennett writes "In his keynote speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said the company once 'had various proposals to have [its] own currency [it was] going to call Google Bucks.' The idea was to implement a 'peer-to-peer money' system, but it was squelched by legal issues."

Comments

Digital Rothschilds

[Anonymous Coward]

"Give me controll of a nation's money supply and i care who not sets its laws...."
-Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Anonymous Coward]

Actual quote: "Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws."

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Fluffeh]

One would argue that they might not do a better job compared to the leaders that we currently vote in.

Here's one for you. Opt in citizenship to a nationless, territory free country. I wonder how many might not try to be a part of such a thing. I often wondered what would happen if a group started buying up adjoining land and reserved it for new members, and spread out and out as more members joined. Set up a civilised statute early on and let people come in as they wanted to.

It would be like colonising an already colonised land through market transactions and finance. I also think it would scare the bejesus out of the governments.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Entropius]

I would sign up for this in a heartbeat.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[sg_oneill]

Here's one for you. Opt in citizenship to a nationless, territory free country.

Awesome, two sets of laws to follow instead of one! Why just the other day I was thinking "Shit , you know what I dont have enough of in my life? Laws!"

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Luckyo]

It would simply die to lack of recognition. It doesn't work if no one recognises you as a country, and no one would.

Sure, you could set extra rules, laws and power structure. But these would only exist on top of what is already in existence in the location of your choice. These mechanisms already exist in many countries, ranging from religious enclaves in Israel and Amish settlements in USA to anarchists of Freetown of Christiania. There are also lesser cases of this, like agreeing to arbitrage by certain courts (for example sharia courts in UK).

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

It sounds like what you need is a good Home Owner's Association!

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Luckyo]

Why? If people feel that they can get arbitrage which suits their beliefs better then government's system, and all parties agree to such arbitrage, and such arbitrage is fully compliant with the existing laws, why is it scary?

I'll assume this was just a bad case of sarcasm malfunction on my part.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[timeOday]

Arbitration (not arbitrage) occurs in various contexts all the time. The same people who freak out about Muslims doing this among themselves, of course, have no qualms about this common practice in business, for example. Or maybe they are just mad because they assume the Muslims stole the idea from 1 Corinthians Chapter 6 in the New Testament (yes, secular courts are clearly unbiblical).

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Corbets]

Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.

I'm guessing you meant voracity - but their habitual truthfulness in leadership may also be unsurprising, I don't know.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[phantomfive]

"Give me controll of a nation's money supply and i care who not sets its laws...."

When I read that quote, I think, "So, a banker thinks he's the most important person in the country. Who would have guessed that a banker would have an overinflated ego?"

Seriously, the one making laws has so many ways to rip control from the one controlling the money, that only a serious lack of creativity could make you believe that the banker was more powerful. To take one example from US history, the lawmakers could confiscate everyone's gold.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[CodeBuster]

It sounds like what you need is a good Home Owner's Association!

That's like living in the "People's Republic of Suburbia", complete with central committee (HOA board), secret police (rent-a-cops), and informants (nosy neighbors).

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[JoelKatz]

Sharia arbitration courts issue rulings that are legally binding on those who have agreed to be bound by them. So, for example, if you and I both wanted to, we could enter into a contract that stipulates that any disputes that arise over the terms of the contract would be settled by a Sharia arbitration court. The rulings would be legally enforceable, provided:

1) The only parties were those who had agreed by contract to be bound by the arbitration prior to the dispute arising.

2) The case is purely civil, not criminal.

3) The court doesn't violate public policy. (For example, if the court refused to allow women to testify, the ruling would likely be unenforceable.)

Orthodox Jews and several other groups have their own "courts" that arbitrate disputes among those who consent by contract to their jurisdiction. Generally, their rulings are enforceable in ordinary civil courts.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Cryacin]

Actually, there are already several principalities around the world. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River

The problem is how to be legally recognised as a seperate country. There have been several groups who have decided to take the easiest legal route, which is to declare war upon a country. Note that in the wikipedia article, the declaration of war is mentioned in the history section. The Australian government did not acknowledge these letters officially, as this would give creedence to the country's secession. They have issued their own coins, code of laws, and a tax rate of 0.5%.

There are many such countries out there, but what has not been done to date, is a serious quantity of land to be bought by a serious number of citizens, an army mounted, and a genuine declaration of war. This would seriously best be done in a place such as Africa or regions of South America where there are areas of land that can be bought at reasonable rates, whilst not being a pacific island that would hold difficulties in sustaining a substantial population.

Perhaps one day the need will be large enough for people to collectively leave and equitably found their own country, but don't forget, established countries will first scoff at a new country, possibly impose trade sanctions if they don't tow the line, and finally, simply declare war and "liberate" it from the "terrorists".

The issues of state are far removed from the issues of daily life.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[makomk]

Actually, there's a special provision in UK law for religious courts that was only moved into the law on binding arbitration in general a few years ago, though even then I think they could only rule on cases where both parties had agreed to be bound by their ruling. The law was created in order to allow Jewish religious courts, so is unlikely to go away any time soon.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Cryacin]

Israel was not established and ratified as a purchased country. It was held by the brits from the second world war, and when the British Mandate was about to expire, they declared independence. It was ratified as a country by the UN, which is quite distinct from the international law doctrine of natural ratification through the declaration of war upon another sovereign.

Even though I'm probably feeding the worst kind of troll, I thought I would correct it before more misinformation was spread.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Ash Vince]

People don't freak out about arbitration, they freak out about the sharia. You know because they stone people and hate women and stuff and think it's ok because the sharia demands it.

If two muslims get some sort of sharia judgement in the UK that involves stoning someone to death, they are most likely both going to prison for a very long time unless they dispose of the corpse nice and quietly and nobody else finds out.

As a brit I have no problems with a couple of Muslims settling their differences outside court by whatever means the like. Just don't expect me to be bound by that shit for a second.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[Anonymous Coward]

Google: "Don't be evil"
Money = root of all evil
Google Bucks =? Divide by zero

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[w_dragon]

Really it's the people who control the police, courts, and military. If all of the above can be bribed then yes, the bankers will run the country. If they can't then the lawmakers run the country. If they are all made up of citizens who don't feel they are above their own laws then the citizens run the country. Generally it's some mix, different countries have different balances of power based on who is capable of being above the law.

Re:Digital Rothschilds

[FatdogHaiku]

... Love of Money = root of all evil

FTFY

For the love of God...

[imamac]

Please no more bit coin stories...oh...my bad.

Re:For the love of God...

[mosb1000]

Yes, as opposed to "real" money, which is different in some meaningfull way, I assure you!

Re:For the love of God...

[Daniel Phillips]

Well of course private money supplies ranks right up there with private militias as a threat to democracy.

Re:For the love of God...

[rtb61]

In this case private money, or a system of internal credit is all about tax evasion and lock in. Goggle would have gained the opportunity to trade in services tax free, buying in for example user content with goggle currency and then on-selling that content for goggle currency not taxable cash. It then treats purchases of google currency not as a purchase but as a deposit. It would then seek to block the sale of google currency for cash to drive lock in to the google currency system. For end users it allows them to trade google currency for services tax free. Once trade in the currency reached at certain level, laws would change and the shit would hit the fan in back taxes.

I believe they did issue currency

[Anonymous Coward]

back in 2004 at an exchange rate of about 85 USD per share. The dollar hasn't fared so well against it since then.

Don't they see the writing on the Google+ Wall?

[Anonymous Coward]

Social Networking is missing a major concept right now. Everyone has something they want to sell. Why not let every social networking user setup a "web store" in their profile to sell things to other users. Think Facebook + Paypal + EBay. Some people will sell services, while others will sell crafts, home made things, or even used items. I know my local club, which has a Facebook group page, would love to sell T-Shirts and buttons to fans of ours. This seems like a missed opportunity. If Google want to get involved with commerce then all they need to do is set it up in Google+.

Don't get me started on my other Google rant. Google+ should have been named "Google Me". Would have been a lot more cool.

Re:This company scares me more and more

[Mouldy]

Then I guess that includes small indie games that have in-game currency or use Facebook credits (which are bought for real world money) should also be shut down. Or casinos that use chips rather than letting you bet at the tables with real money?

Point is, companies have had their own currencies for years. While some people might disagree with those practises - company-specific currency isn't intrinsically bad

Re:This company scares me more and more

[repapetilto]

Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?

Google Money.... Gooney?

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

I wonder what the conversion rate of a 50 dollar bill is into Gooney.

Ah, Gooney sounds kinda lame, I'd have went for street rep instead and called it G-Money.

Would you accept google's governance?

[mykos]

Right now, we get nothing in return for getting all our private data rummaged through by the government.

At least google gives us useful free stuff.

One requirement

[basecastula]

a direct democracy with mandatory voting.

Re:One requirement

[FireFury03]

So the right answer is just C??

Seriously, think before you write stuff. Mandatory voting just gets you more uninformed morons voting. Even worse, they just vote randomly.

If the morons voted randomly then it wouldn't be a problem - the signal is easilly extractable from random noise. The problem is that morons are usually easy to manipulate, so rather than adding random noise they add bias induced by the press.

Re:This company scares me more and more

[basecastula]

Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?

Because you can exchange it for goods that don't originate from said company. Much like cash as opposed to a gift card.

Re:Bitcoin?

[gox]

Schmidt actually brought up Bitcoin himself. Full quote:

6:36 pm Q: If it comes to real democracy, payment has to be peer-to-peer. Would you like to know about my technology called FairCash?

6:37 pm A: Are you familiar with BitCoin? There are some issues with peer-to-peer money. In most cases it's illegal, besides that it's a great idea. We had our own proposal called Google Bucks, but we didn't want to get into these issues. Most of these systems will have reguatory
issues.

Re:Currency?

[plover]

I'm not sure, but I imagine their anthem will go something like this:

[chant and response]
"What are we going to do today, Sergey?"
"Same thing we do every day, Eric. Try to take over the world!"

[music]
They're Pinky and the Brain.
Yes, Pinky and the Brain!
One is a genius,
The other is insane!
They're laboratory mice.
Their genes have been spliced!
They're dinky, they're Pinky and the Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain,
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain,
Brain.

Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled.
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.

They're Pinky and The Brain.
Yes, Pinky and The Brain
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.

To prove their mousy worth,
They'll overthrow the Earth.
They're dinky, they're Pinky and The Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain

Narf!

Ripple Monetary System

[crf00]

When I saw the phrase "peer to peer money's system" I immediately think of the Ripple Monetary System. Please also check out the new Ripple website, Villages.cc, created by Ripple's founder Ryan Fugger last year.

I am not sure whether Google was trying to do the same thing, but it would be a total waste if they gave up on the exact same idea. If there is one thing that Google should do with it's power, it would be P2P money. The entire economic system is in total mess now, and the whole world is in deep need right now for a better economic system, yet why is the financial regulation trying to stop all innovations happening?

The US government is seriously killing all financial innovations by labeling everything alternative to the USD as "money laundering". Remember how Liberty dollar and other gold currencies ended up? How about the countless payment startups that has been killed under the name "money laundering" during the dotcom boom? The Hawala System is very useful even today and it has a very similar concept to Ripple, but it's whole advantages are completely denied by US in the name of money laundering, again. I bet that the FBI would even declare Bitcoin as illegal when it generates enough threat.

I have only been staying in Stockholm for a month, but currently it gives me the feeling that Sweden and some other Europe countries have much more financial freedom than in US. If I were to create a startup based on alternative currencies ideas similar to Google's P2P money or Ripple, then Stockholm would be a much better place than Silicon Valley, all due to the absurd US anti-money laundering regulation.

Re:Ripple Monetary System

[u38cg]

Well, what's your alternative? Money laundering prevention is one of the simplest and most effective crime fighting tools around, as annoying as it may be.

Re:Ripple Monetary System

[Kjella]

I have only been staying in Stockholm for a month, but currently it gives me the feeling that Sweden and some other Europe countries have much more financial freedom than in US. If I were to create a startup based on alternative currencies ideas similar to Google's P2P money or Ripple, then Stockholm would be a much better place than Silicon Valley, all due to the absurd US anti-money laundering regulation.

Oh, I wouldn't bet on it. I'm in Norway, not Sweden but both fairly socialist countries that depend heavily on income taxes and sales taxes. Strictly speaking you can use cash most everywhere, but it's getting more and more biased against it. The last item they've been pushing is electronic tickets for local buses, because they don't want neither bus drivers nor ticket machines getting robbed. You get heavy price incentives to use electronic cards or to pay over your cell phone - there's no such thing as an anonymous cell phone here by the way, that was outlawed quite a few years ago so it's all traceable back to me and there's no such thing as an anonymous debit cards either, they're all registered to your unique id. If I pay any person or company over 10k NOK - about $1800 - in cash during a year, I can be charged as co-conspirator in their tax fraud if they cheat on their taxes for doing nothing other than paying in cash.

Another example is the employee cafeteria, there are several I know of that no longer take cash, either taking just plastic directly or through their own cards you can only charge with plastic. Even if you're a homeless crack addict you don't get food coupons anymore, you get an electronic card only valid in the grocery store - but not for beer. Honestly if it wasn't for a generation of elderly who insist on using cash I'm pretty sure we'd have pushed through a cashless society, because while we're not so heavy on the organized crime and terrorism propaganda, there's plenty of the tax fraud, black economy, anti-robbery propaganda with a good smear of if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

Re:This company scares me more and more

[tehlinux]

More like "Don't get caught," am I right?

Re:This company scares me more and more

[GofG]

In order to live in the United States, you must pay the United States Government a tax. This tax must be in the form of United States Dollars. You can always use USD to pay your taxes. The government is never going to accept anything other than USD, and so there is an anchoring point for USD where there is none for, say, bitcoins. That is what makes USD legitimate; the fact that you can *always guaranteed* use it to pay your taxes.

Why legal issues?

[kbg]

Why would that have legal issues? Doesn't Microsoft have it's own currency called "Microsoft Points"? There doesn't seem to be any problems using that currency?

Re:Why legal issues?

[kbg]

You can not convert MS points back into cash.

I beg to differ

Microsoft Points is just like any other currency. Microsoft can create money from nothing by just "printing" points. There is an exchange rate for the points to other currencies. I really don't see the difference.

Re:Currency?

[Jappus]

A very subtle and easy alteration is all that is needed to make that joke fit that much better:

[chant and response]
"What are we going to do today, Sergey?"
"Same thing we do every day, Larry. Try to take over the world!"

[music]
They're Page-y and the Brin.
Yes, Page-y and the Brin!
One is a genius,
The other is insane!
They're laboratory mice.
Their genes have been spliced!
They're dinky, they're Page-y and the Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin,
Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin,
Brin.

Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled.
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.

They're Page-y and The Brin.
Yes, Page-y and The Brin
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.

To prove their mousy worth,
They'll overthrow the Earth.
They're dinky, they're Page-y and The Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin
Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin

Narf!

Re:This company scares me more and more

[Muad'Dave]

I am not a lawyer, but IMHO no private entity that is not a creditor is "required by law" to accept dollars as payment, either physically as actual notes or as the unit of a promissory note (check). It would be business suicide for a US store to _not_ accept them, but there's plenty of precedent for businesses not accepting physical notes, and pure barter is still quite legal.

Note that I said creditor - the rule of 'all DEBTS public and private' comes in to play when there's a debt owed. Attempting to buy something does not create a debt, so that rule does not apply. Eating in a restaurant that collects payment after the meal DOES create a debt, therefore they must accept currency as payment.

This article has a good discussion.

This guy gets it close, but confuses creditor with seller.