The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
New Money: America's Unsung Patriots
Atomika
Live fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered User regular
Live fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered User regular
There's a campaign to put American women on money, and I'm all for it. Specifically, replacing the controversial Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill with one of America's foremost female heroes, such as Rosa Parks and Eleanor Roosevelt.
Well, the results are in, and the winner is: abolitionist Harriet Tubman.
While this is unlikely to provoke any real change in the immediate term (especially given the current dominance of the paternalistic right-wing in Congress), it sparks an interesting debate that raises several interesting points:
- Should we recontextualize our old crop of national icons in a more modern way that acknowledges their failings as well as their accomplishments? Jackson, specifically, hasn't been treated terribly kindly by history's rear view, but he's hardly alone when it comes to problematic figures from our past.
- Do we have a national problem with acknowledging the role of women in shaping our country? Here's a list of all the people who have appeared on federally-issued legal tender in the US; I'll save you the time and tell you that out of 7 persons on the face of coins and 55 persons on paper currency, there were a total of 3 women and 2 minorities (with one person, Sacajawea being both). There have been more military commanders, senators, governors, treasurers, judges, and even inventors and explorers on our currency than women. Ever heard of Silas Wright or Charles Sumner? Probably not, but they got their mug on a bill at one time. Meanwhile, terribly influential women such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Sojourner Truth remain on the bench.
- Likewise, where are our minorities on our money? Other than Sacajewea, we've had only one other, Running Antelope, a Sioux chief and controversial figure in his own right, as he is mostly known for supporting appeasement with Whites and was removed from Sitting Bull's inner circle for these views. As well, Running Antelope isn't even correctly displayed on his bill, as the engraver depicted him in Pawnee garb instead of Lakota Sioux, purportedly due to it "looking more Indian." Meanwhile, hugely important Americans such as Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. DuBois, Cesar Chavez, and Martin Luther King, Jr, have had virtually nothing to commemorate their crucial place in American history.
Well, the results are in, and the winner is: abolitionist Harriet Tubman.
While this is unlikely to provoke any real change in the immediate term (especially given the current dominance of the paternalistic right-wing in Congress), it sparks an interesting debate that raises several interesting points:
- Should we recontextualize our old crop of national icons in a more modern way that acknowledges their failings as well as their accomplishments? Jackson, specifically, hasn't been treated terribly kindly by history's rear view, but he's hardly alone when it comes to problematic figures from our past.
- Do we have a national problem with acknowledging the role of women in shaping our country? Here's a list of all the people who have appeared on federally-issued legal tender in the US; I'll save you the time and tell you that out of 7 persons on the face of coins and 55 persons on paper currency, there were a total of 3 women and 2 minorities (with one person, Sacajawea being both). There have been more military commanders, senators, governors, treasurers, judges, and even inventors and explorers on our currency than women. Ever heard of Silas Wright or Charles Sumner? Probably not, but they got their mug on a bill at one time. Meanwhile, terribly influential women such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Sojourner Truth remain on the bench.
- Likewise, where are our minorities on our money? Other than Sacajewea, we've had only one other, Running Antelope, a Sioux chief and controversial figure in his own right, as he is mostly known for supporting appeasement with Whites and was removed from Sitting Bull's inner circle for these views. As well, Running Antelope isn't even correctly displayed on his bill, as the engraver depicted him in Pawnee garb instead of Lakota Sioux, purportedly due to it "looking more Indian." Meanwhile, hugely important Americans such as Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. DuBois, Cesar Chavez, and Martin Luther King, Jr, have had virtually nothing to commemorate their crucial place in American history.
+6
Posts
Most likely a high value bank transfer note, which no longer exist because there is no longer any reason for them to.
$500 silver certificate from the 1870's it seems, if Wikipedia is correct.
Rollin' LARGE
Oh god yes. Furthermore, we need to acknowledge the role that past historians played in covering up the actual history of these individuals - a lot of the modern research on Jefferson, for example, has been fueled by the discovery of documents and accounts concealed by historians in order to whitewash his image.
I guess I could put Amelia Earhart as the background on my phone for when I use it for in store purchases and online shopping, but my daughter and wife currently get that honor.
We're talking death and rape threats to campaigners.
The Walking Liberty is a really nice looking coin. I'd be okay with bringing it back.
While you're at it, you should also redesign coins and bills so that smaller coin/bill = lesser value, larger coin/bill = greater value. Maybe change the color of the bills or something, too, so they're not all the same color. Oh, and get rid of the penny and the nickel. They're essentially worthless.
As a foreigner, I have huge trouble telling your money apart (more than with other foreign currencies). And the US government has been sued over the fact that all bills are the same size; blind people can't tell them apart (my understanding is that the blind won the suit but it resulted in no effective change in bill size).
Every other country in the world routinely redesign their currency and phase out lower-denomination coins as inflation makes them worthless; why can't the US? Wait, I think I answered my own question.
They're nice coins but aside from a few times when I went to the bank and specifically asked for them and when I would get $1+ in change from the stamp vending machine at the post office (lololdtimeyproblems) I never saw them. I always thought dollar coins were a great idea, then I basically stopped using cash entirely... Now on the rare occasion I have some it's never coinage unless I've just gotten change from something.
That said, I assume physical currency is going to be a practical necessity for the foreseeable future. As others have said, I think we (the US) should just follow the example of every other first-world nation. Issue new currency designs on a regular basis, with modern (for sufficiently decades-old definitions of modern) features like color and size differentiation. Put iconic stuff on the low-denomination currency like Lady Liberty and such. For high-denomination stuff, rotate through iconic American places and artifacts like the Golden Gate bridge, the Empire State Building, the Grand Canyon, the Hoover Dam, the redwood forests, some buffalo, the liberty bell... There are probably centuries worth of stuff every American would, or at least should, recognize without ever using people.
If you *really* need people on the bills, put the current president on the $100 and change the bill every 4-8 years. They're not all going to be popular or lacking in scandal, but at least a nominal majority of the public thought they were a good enough person to run the nation for a few years.
eh
I wouldn't miss Jackson either. Really one of the Roosevelt presidents need to be put on the money in my opinion.
probably not Teddy
I always thought she looked like she'd been punched in the nose, honestly, the engraving is just weird.
The real problem though is the dollar bill. The switch to a dollar coin is less a convenience issue than it is a finance issue, dollar coins would last longer and cost less in the long run than constantly printing dollar bills would. But people don't have a reason to switch to dollar coins as long as the bills are still around. All the "hurf durf I don't want a bunch of coins in my pocket" complaints are pretty dumb honestly, considering just about every first world nation besides the US has at least a dollar coin, and most have two and five dollar coins. It would require a restructuring of all coinage though really, decreasing the size of the quarter a bit, making a larger diameter but thinner dollar coin and adding a bimetallic coin like the Toonie , two Pound or two Euro coins.
No need to touch the quarter or any other coin. Canadian sub-dollar coinage is identical to US coinage and quarter size vs dollar size is really not an issue.
I'd sincerely prefer Taylor Swift to him.
Buchanan
Ugh I would just get one $100 bill and constantly make out with it good lord
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
FYI, the Indian head Penny depicts lady liberty in a head dress!
Edit: and the 1916 standing liberty quarter is IMO the most beautiful coin ever minted in the US
Interestingly, this is considered one of the core reasons for the downfall of the arcade in the US, as compared to Japan - in the US, we only had the quarter in regular circulation, which made arcades less feasible as newer, more expensive arcade machines were introduced - either you had to have change machines (which needed to be regularly stocked), attendants (which need to be regularly paid), bill collectors (which are extremely finicky), or just eschew money for card-based systems (what most modern arcades use, but these require setup and aren't good at capturing the impulse market - hence modern arcades being structured more as "destination" style affairs.) In comparison, Japan had 100-yen coins (about the same level as a dollar bill), which allowed for a single coin play for much longer.
How do countries with more common changes to their money handle this?
In the Netherlands you can pay by debit card almost everywhere. The only reason I ever use cash is because it is more convenient to pay in cash in a club most of the time.
So yeah I can see where you're coming from.
As long as the government sticks to its guns, no one has any choice but to go along with it. No one switches to the dollar coin because they have the option of continuing to do things the way they've always done them.
Japan changed its 500 yen coin (worth about $5) in 2000. When I moved to Japan in 2001, it was common (especially in rural areas) to encounter vending machines that would only take the old coins. But pretty much everything was changed over within five years. I wasn't in Japan when they changed all their bill designs in 2004, but I believe pretty much the same thing happened.
The fact that other countries are doing it doesn't make the argument invalid. It is objectively easier to carry ten one dollar bills around than ten dollar coins. They're lighter, easier to stash, and harder to lose. There are advantages to coins, but that doesn't make the disadvantages go away.
As far as who gets to be on the money, add another vote to the "abstract symbols" column.
On a side note, I think it's interesting that all of the imaginary people on our money are females, while almost all the real people are males. Apparently we're a big fan of the girls as long as they exist strictly as abstract notions of truth and justice.
I once got 40 of them in a Crown Royal bag from a friend in exchange for getting them an early release RPG book from PAX.
It was like having treasure.
I used them almost exclusively for tips and donations. People's eyes just sparkle when you give them a gold coin.
People HATED that shit.