Actually... I think Jackson is on currency for one main reason. He despised banks, and putting him on currency is a way of upbranding it. If Old Hickory approves of this paper money, it MUST be valuable...
This has gotten totally off message with most voicing pro or con opinions. It’s not fostering non bias discussion about coin collecting. Most of us know the overall demographics of the group. Let get back to neutral discussion and focus on topics discussion like who found the latest 82-d copper penny!! Happy Memorial Day everyone. Remember thousands have died for your freedoms. It is a responsibility to exercise them wisely.
How about historical events....rather than people. Maybe the twin towers on something....Moon landing...First flight...etc
Not to seem argumentative, but I didn't state that changes to the design would kill the USD . . . Just hasten the process already underway. The BRICS nations are already doing a fine job of isolating their key natural resource transactions from USD influence. Any coordinated move by those nations to limit transactions by their citizens would be a watershed event. I can think of no better time for those governments to pull that trigger than when a major redesign of the USD denominated currency results in an obvious change in appearance.
Ah, I see your point. But as I understand it, the old-style $100s are still very widely held overseas, and don't seem to have lost their value there. Or am I mistaken about that?
Hundred dollar bills might be widely held by aristocrats and drug dealers, perhaps, but not common citizens. Besides, my point has less to do with accepting actual physical currency, than with settling debts in USD. My first post was all about undermining confidence in the USD as a unit of exchange, and taking full advantage of a radical change in appearance to at that time plant doubt in the minds of users.
Now, that sounds like the standard argument for ending production of the $100 bill. ("The only people using large amounts of cash are those with something to hide.") And, if inflation means that a standard trip to the grocery store or visit from the plumber costs several hundred dollars, and the largest denomination available is a $20 (or even something smaller)... well, isn't is just easier for everyone to go entirely cashless? It's certainly much easier for the credit card and banking oligopolies, and the IRS, and law enforcement...
Please remember the context of our dialogue . . . we were talking about the citizens of the BRICS nations, not here in the USA.
Whether or not you want Andrew Jackson to stay on the bill, it's important to at least be familiar with the topic. Personally, I agree that we should put historical events instead of controversial politicians on the bills. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-cherokees-vs-andrew-jackson-277394/
How do you find a historical event that isn't controversial? Seems everyone has a gripe about everything. I suppose an earthquake or the Ice Age maybe.
Fair enough, but there are certainly more less-controversial historical events than politicians to choose from. Plus, few people actually trust the politicians in our government.
Nature and animals work for other countries. Or, maybe just a big $20 right in the middle of the bill.
Almost all US cash in circulation around the world is $100 bills. Go overseas enough you will see that. Anything other than current series, $100's get discounted. A $50 or $20 will get at least a 5% discount, and most banks will not accept anything less than that. If you are going overseas with cash, ONLY go with new $100. I believe I read well over 90% of all US FDR notes in existence are $100's. Only in the US do the smaller bills circulate or are needed.
Some of the old Railroad tickets in the 1800's were really fantastic looking! If only everyone could agree we could go back to some of those pics on our currency. Look at this one, no Native Americans, no Uncle Remus, just some hard working people. Very good look to me!