If this happened, and Google was a subscription service, would you subscribe to use Google, Gmail, Youtube and everything else?
Reported for moving and re-titling.
Could you put “hypothetical” in the title.
Just a comment… not trying disagree with you too strongly.
Just a comment that it might add more clarity.
Well, yes, of course I’d pay. My concern is that soon there will be charges like this for many/most services and that it would get out of hand.
…How much is Bing charging?
Do you really think all of the millions of people who use YouTube would continue to use it if they had to pay? Vimeo is free.
no, and its a ridiculous premise. Google already does charge for services. They make a huge amount from keyword advertising and their display ad network. They also have paid versions of mail, google docs etc for companies (google apps for work), and google site search to allow you to have a google powered specific search on your website. Youtube and gmail are also funded by advertising.
Google is primarily an advertising company above all else and a very successful and at the time disruptive one. Why would they kill the golden goose?
Nope.
Its done dilberarly so people evict real feelings so they can answer
My real feeling is that the title is deceptive, because it doesn’t reflect the content of the thread.
I’d certainly pay a few pounds for Google Translate.
It’s misleading because it states Google is actually becoming a pay service instead of presenting it as a hypothetical. And WTF is it doing in General Questions?
Moderator Action
Since this is seeking opinions, let’s move this to IMHO.
Also, edited the title to more clearly indicate the topic.
Moving thread from General Questions to In My Humble Opinion.
It IS, in fact, a hypothetical based on a false premise; that premise being that the people who use gmail, watch youtube videos, deploy the search engine, and enjoy other Google-related activities, are Google’s customers.
We are, instead, Google’s product.
^ Well said.
This idea would work if the payment to Google was hidden inside your regular monthly payment to your internet service provider.
Google could change its policy (like that smarmy “Pharma-bro” guy), and suddenly start charging the ISP companies millions of dollars every month.
And the ISP’s would pass that on to us private citizens as an extra $4 on our regular bill, and we’d never notice.
But…do no evil.
The premise is not, on the face of it, absurd. Once upon a time, TV was free (and there were at most three channels in most places). Now many of us (I assume most of us, actually) pay a cable company for TV.
Effectively the payment to Google is hidden inside the advertising they serve up, and how they monetize your personal data. It’s not a free service, it’s just that you are not clear on how they are monetizing you.
In the current setup, nope. I use Bing for search, Yahoo (inherited from AT&T) for e-mail, and I rarely have a desire to go to youtube. I do use Google when I’m looking for sports scores, because they do a better job of providing the answer on the search page (as opposed to a link to the answer) than Bing does. But I could get over that pretty easily.
I do carry an Android phone, and there are Google services both obvious and hidden all over the place there. I assume that will be taken care of as part of the cost of the phone itself. If not, I’d have to look at the alternatives.
I already get unlimited Drive storage from my university, so I imagine my .edu account would excluded from any future charges. 
However, Bing isn’t all that bad. I find their image search engine to be better than Google the majority of the time. Plus, Microsoft even has a program called “Bing Rewards”. They will pay you in gift cards if you do enough searches a day, but I gave up on it years ago; it’s very time consuming for what I got out of it. But still, I’d rather Bing pay me than me pay Google.
The new Google Photos service is fantastic though. I may consider paying $4.95 for that if I couldn’t find a decent alternative photo backup service.