, these were issued prior to the 1929 bill size reduction.$20 Gold Certificate with Geo. Washington

$20 Federal Reserve Note with Grover Cleveland

Advertisement

by Grays Harbor » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:33 am
, these were issued prior to the 1929 bill size reduction.


by Consaria » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:36 am

by Grays Harbor » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:40 am
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Grays Harbor wrote:Charlotte Ryberg wrote:There isn't a $200 note, and if that was to be introduced I would suggest Martin Luther King. In my opinion banknotes don't always have to have presidents.
They aren't always presidents. Several notes have been issued that have others on them, many of which have already been talked about here, with examples such as the Chief Running Antelope $5 from 1899, and the current $10 with Alexander Hamilton and the $100 with Benjamin Franklin.
Sometimes reading the entire topic before responding is a good thing.
Yes, I was also thinking about the founders being on the notes but the banknote series seems to forget about modern-day everyday heroes like Luther-King.

by Grays Harbor » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:46 am
Consaria wrote:I would change the $100,000 to an idiot. Because you have to be one to carry around $100,000 in your pocket

by Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:46 am
Grays Harbor wrote:Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Grays Harbor wrote:Charlotte Ryberg wrote:There isn't a $200 note, and if that was to be introduced I would suggest Martin Luther King. In my opinion banknotes don't always have to have presidents.
They aren't always presidents. Several notes have been issued that have others on them, many of which have already been talked about here, with examples such as the Chief Running Antelope $5 from 1899, and the current $10 with Alexander Hamilton and the $100 with Benjamin Franklin.
Sometimes reading the entire topic before responding is a good thing.
Yes, I was also thinking about the founders being on the notes but the banknote series seems to forget about modern-day everyday heroes like Luther-King.
It hasn't always been "founding fathers" or Presidents on banknotes issued by the US.
Who's Who of US Currency
My own preference for the first African-American on a banknote would be Booker T. Washington as he made so many contributions to science and education.

by Drachmar » Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:33 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Drachmar wrote:Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Pictures on the money is stupid and infantile.
Each note should be unique. And no "money transfer" should be legal without reference to (ie verifiable possession of) a unique note or notes.
The anonymity of money is precisely what is evil about money. And it's not hard to fix.
It would put a spoke in the wheel of bankers, too. They have the power to mint currency (to create bargainable assets at no cost -- ie, mint currency) and they would not have that power if 'money' was strictly defined as unique treasury notes.
For nearly the first 100 years of the history of the U.S. this was done, and it was an absolute failure. Counterfeiting was rampant, and there was no guarantee that your notes were transferable from one bank to another. If one bank failed, another was not obligated to back your note. It's was a horrible system, and the reason the U.S. went to a standardized paper/coin system of notes.
I fail to see how counterfeiting is even possible if each note has a complete "paper trail" -- a searchable record of who legally owns each note. That might not have been possible a hundred years ago but it is now. Even in so far as paper money is even necessary (electronic transactions are already fully auditable) it can be made machine-readable by simply printing a bar-code on existing notes.
The next generation of notes should have microchips in them, so that the redemption value of a note can be cancelled at the Treasury's discretion. That puts a much higher onus on users of the money not to accept the proceeds of crime, which ultimately makes crime for profit less feasible. Yes, you can sell an illegal good for Ho-bucks, redeemable only with your local gang ... but that's a lot less attractive than legal cash which can be spent anywhere on earth. The exchange rate (or laundering cost) would be a strong deterrent to the black market, since it would settle at the level which law enforcement permits unauthorized transfer of money.
The benefits for tax compliance and detection of crime and corruption are alone enough to make such a scheme revenue-positive.
There are more serious objections, surely? Isn't what I'm suggesting exactly like the "gold standard" but without the gold to back it?
At the very least, object on the grounds of the vast restructuring necessary to back all existing debts with assets. Borrowing to invest puts the economy in an aggressive stance which is actually dependent on economic growth, and puts at a disadvantage any trader who tries to operate without debt. At some point of growing debt and growing ownership of debt (private corporate and governmental) someone isn't going to get their money back. We can't all be borrowers!
But let's just wait 'til it breaks, shall we? Because the alternative is like coming off drugs, a long hard grind which is experienced as a recession because profits are going to where they should always have stayed, in capital investments. The long period of consolidation means no new spending, no new sectors growing of the economy without reduction of some other. No, it's much easier to just stay artificially pumped on debt until something breaks ....
What about economic growth, you ask? Isn't growth good? Simple. Economic growth equals the rate of printing new money (unique bills or even just the identifying number of a virtual 'buck' being authorized to a spender -- who would of course be the government.) When the economy grows, government gets more spending money, when it shrinks government has to sell assets to cover the cost of the money they ... wait for it ... burn.
On economics I'm just a hare-brain. I'm sure you can raise more substantial objections to what I suggest, so hit me.

by Maerngau » Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:53 am

by Maerngau » Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:58 am
Lacadaemon wrote:An archy wrote:Takaram wrote:I still think that Jackson should have been shot for this.
He did get shot.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=544
Some people have asked, If you could go back in time and kill Hitler before he came to power, would you do it? Noone ever asked that question about Andrew Jackson, because he'd only survive and become an even crazier lunatic.
He's probably still alive somewhere. Waiting...
Mind you he was the only president who ever managed to stand up to the financial services lobby, so he probably deserves to be on the money somewhere.

by Tsa-la-gi Nation » Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:10 am
Pope Joan wrote:Jackson is overrated as a "strong" president.
He was a rqacist bigot who did much to harm the nation.
Put Jefferson on the 20 instead; he actually made a positive contribution.

by Tsa-la-gi Nation » Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:51 am
Martaz wrote:i think Ronald Reagan,the best US president so far, need a currency


by Grays Harbor » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:32 am

by Cosmera » Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:03 pm
Grays Harbor wrote:of course, we could always dig a little deeper for older designs, like the pre-civil war days when it was banks that issued the currency, not the government. Quite a diversity of design. A few what we would consider odd denominations as well.


by Tunizcha » Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:04 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Angeloid Astraea, Hollow Rock, Ifreann, Immoren, Point Blob, Port Caverton, Riviere Renard
Advertisement