Are The Banksters Creating Their Own Cryptocurrency Called "Utility Settlement Coin"?

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

Independently-controlled cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin may or may not survive in the long run, but blockchain technology is definitely here to stay. 

This technology has revolutionized how digital financial transactions are conducted, and it was only a matter of time before the big boys began to adopt it.  Previously, I have written about how the Washington Post is hyping something known as ‘Fedcoin’, but Fedcoin does not yet exist.

However, a digital currency that uses blockchain technology that is called ‘Utility Settlement Coin’ is actually very real, and it is currently being jointly developed by four of the largest banking giants on the entire planet.  The following was recently reported by Wolf Richter

UBS, BNY Mellon, Deutsche Bank, Santander, the market operator ICAP, and the startup Clearmatics formed an alliance in 2016 to explore the use of digital currency between financial institutions and central banks, using blockchain.

 

The ultimate goal of the project is to create a digital currency known as Utility Settlement Coin (USC), which will facilitate payment and settlement for institutional financial markets.

I decided that I had to know more about Utility Settlement Coin, and so I decided to go to the source.

This is what the official Deutsche Bank website says about Utility Settlement Coin…

USC is an asset-backed digital cash instrument implemented on distributed ledger technology for use within global institutional financial markets. USC is a series of cash assets, with a version for each of the major currencies (USD, EUR, GBP, CHF, etc.) and USC is convertible at parity with a bank deposit in the corresponding currency. USC is fully backed by cash assets held at a central bank. Spending a USC will be spending its paired real-world currency.

 

UBS and Clearmatics launched the concept in September 2015 to validate the potential benefits of USC for capital efficiency, settlement and systemic risk reduction in global financial markets. The project was initially incubated as part of the UBS Crypto 2.0 Pathfinder Program, UBS’s initiative for research and experimentation on blockchain.

This could ultimately turn out to be a complete and total gamechanger. 

UBS, BNY Mellon, Deutsche Bank and Santander are four of the biggest banks in the western world, and the fact that they are working on this project together is a sign that they are very serious about succeeding.

Will the general public still be willing to pay a huge premium for independently-controlled cryptocurrencies once the banksters start coming out with their own versions?

The cryptocurrency revolution is still in the very early stages, and nobody is exactly sure how it will end, but without a doubt the banksters will be a major player in this drama.  If you doubt this, just consider what one of the top executives at UBS is saying about Utility Settlement Coin

“Digital cash is a core component of a future financial market fabric based on blockchain technologies,” said Hyder Jaffrey, Head of Strategic Investment & FinTech Innovation at UBS Investment Bank.

 

“There are several digital cash models being explored across the Street. The Utility Settlement Coin is focused on facilitating a new model for digital central bank cash.

Digital central bank cash?

I don’t like the sound of that at all.

We definitely do not want the banksters to co-opt this movement.  Blockchain technology should be used to free humanity from debt-based central banking, but instead the exact opposite could end up happening.

If someday independently-controlled cryptocurrencies are completely banned or suffocated nearly out of existence by oppressive regulation, the way would be clear for the banksters to force everyone to use their own digital currencies.  There are many nations around the world that have already gone nearly cashless, and the potential for tyranny in a cashless system where all digital currency is controlled by the banksters would be absolutely off the charts.

*  *  *

Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, and you can learn how you can get involved in the campaign on his official website. His new book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.

Comments

ShrimpinAin'tEasy Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:40 Permalink

I wonder if it can beat the lightning speed '7 transactions per second' pace that bitcoin boasts. Hey ~ Harold Abrahams won the 1924 Olympic 100 meters in a blazing 10.6 seconds! I ran 10.2 in high school and couldn't even make our 4x100 relay team. They had to stretch me out to the 400 because the coach liked to see me cough up blood.

Mark777 ShrimpinAin'tEasy Wed, 12/27/2017 - 10:07 Permalink

Yes, BitCoin confirmation speeds are better than the days currently taken to confirm transfers, etc.  But 7 per second and 86,400 seconds in a day would limit those to a total of some 600,000 per day.  Can that satisfy a worldwide transaction demand?We have to face the fact that currently BitCoin, even Etherium, cannot run all the world's transactions.  For example, VISA processes some 300 times as many transactions per second and one site estimated that it can process up to 50,000+ per second.  True, these are different technologies, different uses and simple comparisons are inaccurate, apples to oranges.  But the current BlockChain method (DLT = Distributed Ledger Technology) is unable to match current world needs.http://www.altcointoday.com/bitcoin-ethereum-vs-visa-paypal-transaction…, some have advocated HashGraph as a better, faster technology being developed.  One site said it can do over 250,000 transactions per second.  It is still in development, it's source code yet to be released but there is a future for it.https://hashgraph.com/

In reply to by ShrimpinAin'tEasy

ShrimpinAin'tEasy Mark777 Wed, 12/27/2017 - 10:27 Permalink

"600,000 per day.  Can that satisfy a worldwide transaction demand?" Notwithstanding a forensic analysis, it would be hard to argue that that would even be enough to handle a scenario like if the rubber washer on the Winklevoss, Silbert, & Schrem HODLings spigot accidently got loose. FFS ~ how many bitcoins was it again that the FBI jokers had?

In reply to by Mark777

Banjopicker Mark777 Wed, 12/27/2017 - 11:47 Permalink

Hashgraph at this point is vaporware and will not be a coined technology that people can invest in.  They are pretty clear they are working towards in house corporate environments called shards. Ripple, or XRP, on the other hand already does what this utility coin is described as doing.  It is also already in market between Korean and Japanese banks.  It processes as fast as 2-4 seconds, costs less than a penny to move over a billion dollars, and removes the banks need for nostro reserve accounts.  They also are already in the good graces of regulators and banking. That said, if Hashgraph changes their model to a coin based system, I will likely drop some speculative money into it. 

In reply to by Mark777

cherry picker Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:35 Permalink

Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional DistrictAnother politician, says one thing before and if and when he ever gets in will play follow the leader and be no better thant the other slime bags in .gov

Yellow_Snow Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:39 Permalink

Snyder is quite ignorant of the fact that there is not 'one' generic cryptcurrency...  There will be 'centralized crypto's' and 'decentralized crypto's'...  That is a huge difference...  Decentralized Crypto's will rule in the end - they are why we are investing in this stuff...

aloha_snakbar Yellow_Snow Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:50 Permalink

How do you even sleep at night, troll ?Thought experiment: You time travel to the year 2116, where martial law has become a permanent partof the lanscape. There has been a 'one world currency' for nearly ninety years. When the government first introduced their digital fiats, all early crypto players were rounded up and euthanized, because honestly,how could anyone trust someone who sold out their countrymen for a few shekels, much the same asGeorge Soros sold out his fellow Jews to the Nazis for a few extra scraps of bread. People are born in labor camps,and they die there, after a long and miserable life of working for .gov.You run into a future ancestor of yours, a great great great grand daughter, and she asks you one question: why ? Why did you do it...for the money? What do you say to her ?

In reply to by Yellow_Snow

ShrimpinAin'tEasy Yellow_Snow Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:56 Permalink

@Yellow You'll get some agreement and disagreement with this one. On balance, I tend to agree with what you say (but there will definitely be a battle royale between attempts at centralization, and de-centralized endeavors). I look at it this way: CENTRALIZATION will  use efficiency and interface as a lure, while DECENTRALIZATION will resemble bartertown. The danger will come if too many people get sucked into the CENTRALIZATION paradigm. It's hard to make a case that masses can resist that. People (& I hate to say this, but especially women), have already demonstrated that they have a stunning propensity to get sucked into centralization schemes. Facebook, Google, Smartphones, Amazon, FFS~ everything down the line from Starbucks coffee & going all the way back to 1950's style modern kitchens. There are a few out there (and more than a few here on ZH), but it's difficult to find a PIONEER WOMAN out there. & the trouble is, there are more CUCK males out there that are more than willing to get led around by their dicks to be slaves to the SHOE CLOSET class than there are Pioneer women.

In reply to by Yellow_Snow

quadraspleen Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:46 Permalink

an “asset-backed digital cash instrument”

Ok, there *may* be some transparency if they use a blockchain, but what’s the asset? If there’s a backing asset there’s still 3rd-party risk. Someone has to hold that asset. Who? (Clue: a central bank)

Kinda defeats the object of decentralised currency, no?

dark fiber Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:46 Permalink

Dead on arrival.  The point of Bitcoin is that is it something outside the banking system.  If people had any faith in banks they would have stuck with their currency.  The moment cryptocoins are perceived as something the banks like and embrace is the moment Bitcoin and the rest crash to zero.

Rickety Rekt Silver Savior Wed, 12/27/2017 - 11:38 Permalink

I am also long xrp, hodling, made half my purchase at .22.It is clearly the bank coin. This article was so poorly researched IMO. Ten mins of looking into who is on team XRP and it is extremely obvious. USC has a few banks working with it. XRP has north of 50. RBC UBS CIBC Scotia Standard Charter etc. Has done testing in India, Japan, and Korea. Small bank where I live used XRP platform to send a payment across the world in 6 seconds (settled-June 2016). That bank is now ready to jusy turn the system on whenever everyone is on boars. No name bank ready to flip the switch with the big boys. Oh and XRP has had closed door meetings with 12 central banks....This article has been deemed fake newz.

In reply to by Silver Savior

0hedgehog Wed, 12/27/2017 - 09:57 Permalink

"Digital central bank cash? I don’t like the sound of that at all..." Well get used to that sound because that is exactly what they are ushering in with bitcoin. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that bitcoin was a construct of the NSA to begin with, with the sole purpose of corralling the masses into the one world digital money realm voluntarily. Most people think it's no big deal to lose cold hard cash money but we evidently are going to find out the hard way what a big deal it is and there will be no going back once that becomes a reality. How will you like it when you are no longer in control of your own money? The only "hands" that will ever hold your wealth will be banker's hands!

lil dirtball 0hedgehog Wed, 12/27/2017 - 10:07 Permalink

> I wouldn't be surprised

Why should you? Look at all this (((digital tech))). It's all used for surveillance and tracking ... physical, financial, purchases ... etc. And somehow this 'blockchain' tech is not like all that came before it? We know it's all hackable and crackable, unless the spooks want otherwise ... and they don't. They want to know 'what's in your wallet' - and they will.

No surprises here ... but the alarms are screaming for those who can hear them.

In reply to by 0hedgehog