[RD] US physical currency should be completely redesigned.

[metatron]

I've never had one of the new Canadian bills rip on me or ever been given a ripped or compromised bill. It is wholly nonsensical to claim their integrity is worse than that of paper bills.

"New" is the operative term here.
But bills are not supposed to be new. They are supposed to be "in use".

I am plenty aware that it is virtually impossible to tear right into a fresh polymer note.
The problem is that polymer notes are in no way resistant to creasing and subsequently tear extremely easily in the former location of the creases. Much more easily than paper-cotton notes.
I suppose the problem is that the polymer breaks internally, though i wouldn't know.

Point being: While paper-cotton money can be intentionally ripped on day one, it can be bent, folded, creased significantly, which weakens it but still requires pretty significant intent for tearing it.
Used, actually used, creased etc. polymer money comes apart on the former creases virtually on its own.

Again: This problem can be easily alleviated by just not using the money.

 

[Arwon]

Yeah criticising the durability is kind of an odd take.

 

[Arwon]

Plus they can go through the wash and go swimming with you. Coming out of the pool or ocean and immediately buying a Cornetto in your boardies with fiver you stashed is an essential experience.

 

[Traitorfish]

• I had trouble to properly communicate how it was normal for other countries to have representatives of theretofore disadvantaged classes (say women or minorities) on money for achievements other than advocacy or activisim in favor of such a group's rights, heck, usually even achievements to which their class membership was irrelevant. I.e. artists or scientists who merely happened to be, say, women.

• Then i usually struggled to establish how exclusively having political leaders/authorities on money is something that usually countries in either of the following categories do: Constitutional monarchies (think UK), banana republics, totalitarian dictatorships.
  In line with these two problems i couldn't help but show my amazement at how one Mr. Oliver apparently finds the notion of putting a female aviator on money ridiculous - obviously i can't help but find that... rather British.

A small note in defence of Caledonian honour, we've been doing this for yonks. The specifics vary between our three note-issuing banks, but the general rule is to have some famous dead Scot on one side, and some generically Scottish scene on the other, usually a castle or, for some reason, a bridge. Of the famous dead personages currently in circulation, there are three writers, three scientists, two social reformers, an architect, an engineer and an economist; the only political figures are a Medieval king so dead that he's more of a mythical figure at this point, and an eighteenth century duke who's recognised exclusively as "that guy on the money", and he's already in the process of being phased out in favour of some non-royal women. What you describe, while very real, seems to be a peculiarly English problem.

/scots talking about themselves

 

[innonimatu]

I'm not so sure, I think a constant and huge supply of cheap labor is a big factor in the Latin-Americanization of the US. I notice the same here in France, where the endless supply of cheap immigrant labor (Africans here instead of Mexicans in the US) allow me to live a "rich Brazilian lifestyle", complete with a maid to clean my apartment and people to serve coffee at my office. This certainly would have been much harder (or more expensive) in previous decades.

I have to wonder: has it ever crossed you mind that there are people who choose not to have domestic servants even though they could pay to hire them? Because they have a repugnance of being served to such a degree and believe people ought not to be used in such a way?

I also have to wonder how much of this preference to either have servants, or refuse to have servants, is socially learned, versus how much is it dependent on the means to do so.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Here is my favorite Tubman design.

 

[Arwon]

I think on our banknotes we only have the Queen as a head of state or governmentthen the only other politician is the first woman in parliament who probably isn't primarily known for her surprise political career.

The rest are an opera singer, a WW1 general, a writer/inventor, a socialist poet, a non-socialist poet, a post-convict era merchant/ship owner/philanthropist, and the founder of the flying doctors. Gender split is 50/50, and David Unaipon (writer and inventor) is the only indigenous figure.

 

[metatron]

Yeah criticising the durability is kind of an odd take.

We do things like this...

Spoiler :

...to our money. It's fine afterwards.
You do this to a polymer note and it's soooo a goner.

Extreme example i know, but your non-technology really doesn't appreciate being creased or crumpled.

Plus they can go through the wash and go swimming with you. Coming out of the pool or ocean and immediately buying a Cornetto in your boardies with fiver you stashed is an essential experience.

I think the utility for water-proof money i pretty much at its global maximum in Australia.
(I have been gentle with that remark, don't make me come back to upgrade it.)

In regards to the new English 5 pound bill i have often heard the myth of accidentally washing bills in the washing machine cited as a supposedly big advantage of polymer bills.
But come to think of it, i believe this has never happened to me. And i have faint recollection of it happening to someone i know, like, once, ever. And they just had the bill exchanged.

On the other hand, if youtube is any indication at least a small minority of Americans are in the habit of ironing crumpled up 1$ bills for renewed use in vending machines. Which is obviously not advised with polymer bills.

Needless to say both applications strike me as dubiously marginal.

A small note in defence of Caledonian honour, we've been doing this for yonks. The specifics vary between our three note-issuing banks, but the general rule is to have some famous dead Scot on one side, and some generically Scottish scene on the other, usually a castle or, for some reason, a bridge. Of the famous dead personages currently in circulation, there are three writers, three scientists, two social reformers, an architect, an engineer and an economist; the only political figures are a Medieval king so dead that he's more of a mythical figure at this point, and an eighteenth century duke who's recognised exclusively as "that guy on the money", and he's already in the process of being phased out in favour of some non-royal women. What you describe, while very real, seems to be a peculiarly English problem.

/scots talking about themselves

Oh no, you are of course correct.
And i should have taken the time to highlight how - curiously - Scotland manages to have paper money without the Queen on it.

I also have to wonder how much of this preference to either have servants, or refuse to have servants, is socially learned, versus how much is it dependent on the means to do so.

Yeah, Germany is at the far end of this.
I could bore you with information on the causes, but i think at least on this end it's a matter of culture.

 

[Arwon]

... why would you want to do origami with your notes tho

 

[Camikaze]

I'm actually pretty sure I can't physically tear Australian notes with my hands. Though I'm not willing to try too hard on the 50s I just got from an ATM...

 

[metatron]

I'm actually pretty sure I can't physically tear Australian notes with my hands. Though I'm not willing to try too hard on the 50s I just got from an ATM...

I had allready conceded that teraring right into a relatively fresh polymer note was exceedingly hard. I have also made a case for that not being the point at all.
You might have missed that. I don't know.

... why would you want to do origami with your notes tho

In this extreme version?
For gifting them, i suppose.
In a more casual fashion, that will still break polymer notes relatively soon?
For storage or marking. You know, like marking with a creased corner, storing on the side (say in a register) by way of folding vertically twice (or even thrice, or some other way).
I have witnessed people do this habitually for various ends, at various jobs i had, and in most cases i can't argue with the practical merit of the habit all that much.

 

[Camikaze]

No, just an idle observation.

The practical merit of doing particular things with currency largely depends upon the particular features of that currency. For instance, it would be pretty annoying to not be able to fold a note vertically (by which I assume is meant the halving of the shorter side) if that note were e.g. the absurdly tall 50 Euro note. That has little to do with the material of which the note is made.

I don't actually know what 'marking with a creased corner' means (perhaps because this is apparently not something that cannot be done with Australian currency).

 

[Arwon]

I've got a $10 printed in 2007 that I certainly can't tear. It's also virtually indistinguishable in terms of wear from the 2015 one.

 

[metatron]

(by which I assume is meant the halving of the shorter side)

The opposite.
(You look at the thing - should be pretty clear what's vertical, as per orientation of the large font.)

if that note were e.g. the absurdly tall 50 Euro note.

Hmm, now that you say it, Australian money isn't very tall anymore. Your old bills were, though.

The practical merit of doing particular things with currency largely depends upon the particular features of that currency.

No. The utility of being able to fold a bill twice vertically or once each way to, say put it into an extra compartment say in a cash register intended for coins or miscellanious objects pretty much applies to Aussie money at a height of 65mm as well.

I don't actually know what 'marking with a creased corner' means

You crease a corner, resulting in a fifth side of the bill at two 45° angles, typically some 2cm in length (possibly longer, depending on the purpose).


This all has not touched yet upon the most common cause for creased bills: Negligent storage, such as loose in pockets, which obviously applies more to the US (due to the denominations).

 

[Arwon]

No. The utility of being able to fold a bill twice vertically or once each way to, say put it into an extra compartment say in a cash register intended for coins or miscellanious objects pretty much applies to Aussie money at a height of 65mm as well.

You mean like this?

 

[metatron]

PS (I had this as a PS to the last post, but we got that crossed):
I find this fold and crease debate increasingly besides the point.
I have made a case that the pratical utility of polymer money is not as one-sided as to warrant coming in here to advertise it like it's mana from heaven.
I am willing to entertain commentary as to how this tallow business is not a problem.
Other than that i'm done with the issue of the material and would prefer to return to the actual topic of the thread. In the broadest sense.
E.g. Feel free to debate who should be on Australian money.

I appreciate that you really like this polymer business, but this increasingly feels like a derailment. /PS​

You mean like this?View attachment 481119

That's a gentle approach to a crease. Take a ruler (fingernails if you have them) and make it stick.
Alternatively: Grab a couple volumes of encyclopedia and leave them on the thing over night.

Also spoiler the thing please.

 

[Zelig]

I have to wonder: has it ever crossed you mind that there are people who choose not to have domestic servants even though they could pay to hire them? Because they have a repugnance of being served to such a degree and believe people ought not to be used in such a way?

Yeah, I spend my efforts on home automation and robots instead of paying domestic servants.

 

[Perfection]

I mean we gotta keep some of the old dead white guys - I say we gotta probably keep these 3:
1. Lincoln (keep him on the 5, the penny can be ditched)
2. Jefferson (keep him on the nickel, but we can go crazy on the 2 dollar bill because nobody ever uses it anyways)
3. Washington (keep him on the quarter, ditch the dollar bill and let Sacagawea take over)

Ambivalent on:
Franklin (I say keep him on the $100 but I'm really personally biased towards Franklin - he was awesome)
FDR (I'd say he's dimweaorthy and vote keep)
Hamilton (I guess I should see the musical first but I'd say screw it, ditch him)
Kennedy (it's the 50cent piece but we can probably do better - I call ditch)

Definitely should ditch Jackson and Grant.

Tubman on the 20 is good. We probs should get around to putting MLK on some currency too, I'd go with the $10.

That leaves us with $50, 50cent, $2 up for grabs. We need a real A-lister for the 50, but I don't see why we can't go wild on the 50cent and $2.

 

[Traitorfish]

I'd say that I've put a bank-note through the wash about as many times as I've folded it into an elephant, for what it's worth.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I have to wonder: has it ever crossed you mind that there are people who choose not to have domestic servants even though they could pay to hire them? Because they have a repugnance of being served to such a degree and believe people ought not to be used in such a way?

I also have to wonder how much of this preference to either have servants, or refuse to have servants, is socially learned, versus how much is it dependent on the means to do so.

Around here, the wealthy do have "people to do things" for them because they prefer not to do them (ie. mow the lawn, do the shopping, walk the dog, run other errands).

In other cases, it seems to be a matter of time (ie. placing a grocery order and getting them delivered, rather than going to the store in person) or ability (there are programs for the physically disabled, to help with things that are difficult or impossible to do alone).

Yeah, I spend my efforts on home automation and robots instead of paying domestic servants.

I would love it if a robot would come along and do the litter box cleaning. It's not that big a deal most of the time, but it's an inconvenience I wouldn't mind if someone else did.

I mean we gotta keep some of the old dead white guys - I say we gotta probably keep these 3:
1. Lincoln (keep him on the 5, the penny can be ditched)
2. Jefferson (keep him on the nickel, but we can go crazy on the 2 dollar bill because nobody ever uses it anyways)
3. Washington (keep him on the quarter, ditch the dollar bill and let Sacagawea take over)

Ambivalent on:
Franklin (I say keep him on the $100 but I'm really personally biased towards Franklin - he was awesome)
FDR (I'd say he's dimweaorthy and vote keep)
Hamilton (I guess I should see the musical first but I'd say screw it, ditch him)
Kennedy (it's the 50cent piece but we can probably do better - I call ditch)

Definitely should ditch Jackson and Grant.

Tubman on the 20 is good. We probs should get around to putting MLK on some currency too, I'd go with the $10.

That leaves us with $50, 50cent, $2 up for grabs. We need a real A-lister for the 50, but I don't see why we can't go wild on the 50cent and $2.

What are the rules in your country for putting someone on the money? Here they have to be Canadian, have made some kind of significant contribution to the country, and have been dead for at least 25 years.

Some people have been speculating that Pierre Trudeau (father of our current PM) will end up on the money some day, and wouldn't it be weird if that happened while his son was PM... I don't think it's going to happen, though. Pierre Trudeau won't be eligible until 2025 (he died in 2000) and while there are no term limits here for how long someone can be Prime Minister if they remain the party leader and keep winning elections, I think it's optimistic at best that Justin Trudeau would still be PM in 2025.

BTW... I had no idea the Americans had a $2 bill. I never saw any on my trips to Washington state.