I can't believe no one posted anything on this. What? Were you guys all waiting for me? (New $100 Bill Images) (I wonder if a new $500 bill would be similar)
Drago the Wolf
I was a little disappointed with the back of the new $100 at first,
because I thought the low-vision numeral would be similar to the $10,
$20 and $50's, but now I grew to love both sides of the new $100 bill
and the $100 is now by far, my favorite of this series.
What sucks is, it is being released on Febuary 10 of 2011. I wonder
why so long, because they are likely just about to release the next
generation of U.S. currency. If the U.S. currency is going to be
redesigned every 7-10 years, 2011 when the new $100 bill comes out
will be 9 years since 2003, when the new colorized $20 bill came out,
so, following the release of the new $100 bill in 2011, we may be
hearing more about one of the already colorized denominations getting
a redesign again the following year in 2012, the 10 year mark.
I have heard a few things about the governement possibly changing the
size of all denomination paper money and probably the designs a bit
too, except the $1 and $2 bills. This really bothers me seeing as, I
live in a family of people with poor vision, and my mother can hardly
see without glasses, and has a hard time telling $1 and $2 bills apart
without her glasses unless they are right in her face. I myself am
20/400 vision in both eyes and can see all right, but am supposed to
wear glasses full time, but I only wear them when I drive or watch tv.
I just can't read things in the distance, but, in the future I may
depend on a different sized $2 bill. So I don't see why, if the
government does not want to redesign or change the size of the $1
bill, thats is all fine and dandy with me, but if all other
denominations are getting a redesign, as well as a resize, redesign
the damn $2 bill. I DO NOT want them to just stop printing $2s, I just
want them redesigned to make them more usable for those who use them.
Everything else, including the half dollar coin has a distinguishible
feature for the blind and visually impaired: its size. So, if the $1
and $2 bills remain the same size, and all other denominations will
change in size, the $2 bill would still be discrimitory against the
blind and visually impaired. Perhaps I should write THAT in a letter
to my government officials.
I wish they would just get rid of the rag $1 and $2 bucks.
Unfortunately, in the testimony I read, no denomination was considered
to be replaced with a coin, which is a real shame, because they could
really make a nice $2 coin distinguishible for the blind.
sgt23
Well I guess you can post if you want too, as long as I don't have
hear about anymore cats and dogs on coins or currency, and please get
rid of the $1 coins and replace them with some kinda design that is
presentable and tasteful.
Bruce Remick
"sgt23" <bravesfa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:21db0769-d63f-4ece...@k29g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
===
Like, for instance......? Roast duck with lemon glaze?
Mike Dworetsky
Regarding vision-impaired users and bank notes, the USA has finally taken a
lesson from the UK which has had bank notes of different sizes for different
denominations for decades. Similarly for the euro.
>
> I wish they would just get rid of the rag $1 and $2 bucks.
> Unfortunately, in the testimony I read, no denomination was considered
> to be replaced with a coin, which is a real shame, because they could
> really make a nice $2 coin distinguishible for the blind.
Much the same sentimentality was widely expressed in the UK 28 years ago
when the pound note was replaced by the pound coin. There was a lot of
opposition to doing away with it; you would have thought they were proposing
to murder babies or something.
For some reason (presumably there were thought to be votes in it)
politicians in the USA were opposed to replacement of the $1 by a coin, and
when you did get one it looked like a quarter. Eventually that was fixed,
except that apparently the note and coin circulate side by side.
The average life of a circulating $1 note must be a few weeks at most.
There are still 1983 1 pound coins circulating in the UK. The coin is far
cheaper to make when you factor in the lifetime factor.
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
Bruce Remick
"Mike Dworetsky" <plati...@pants.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:H7ydnTGCI5xfakfW...@bt.com...
The paper note is made from a renewable source while clad metal coins are
not. How much money would really be saved by eliminating the $1 bill while
continuing to print $2, $5, $10, $20, $50, and $100 bills? Plus millions
of unused $1 coins. So far, no need for the expense of a security redesign
of the $1 bill either. BTW, are the latest plastic bills made from oil?
In the US, there likely are loads of one dollar coins remaining in storage
from 1979 that won't circulate largely because people don't care to use
them. Nowadays, people don't handle coins often enough for them to wear
out. Fifty years ago, it was common to receive well worn coins in change.
Today it's common to find fifty-year-old coins showing minimal wear among
your change, coins that would likely last another fifty years.
sgt23
> "sgt23" <bravesfandevo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Hey it beats the crap we have on our coins now.
Bruce Remick
======
Do you really believe that non-collectors actually look to examine the
design of the coins they spend? As long as they see it's a quarter, dime,
etc., they couldn't care less what's on it when they spend it. As
collectors, many of us tend to get emotional about new coin designs (along
with old ones) and usually are eager to voice our opinions about each new
one. If you don't care for the subjects on our dollar coins, I doubt you
encounter them that often to worry about it.
sgt23
No, I can't say I've received many dollar coins change, but I lay this
fault at the feet of the mint. It's just that I feel the mint should
have more pride in the job they do, and they shouldn't run the mint
just for profit only, but too show what we as a country are capable of
doing. I know most of you guys don't have same views that I do. Though
that is okay, because that is one things that is still great about
this country we live in. We have right to opinions and ideals, and we
can take them and mix those ideals and opinion's too come up with
something close to perfection. In my experience's in life, I've
learned that it doesn't take just one great mind too make something
work to perfection, but many. Now if we could just get the mint and
government too understand that. JMHO for what ever that is worth
"probably not much".
Bruce Remick
=====
So exactly what do you think is "unpresentable" and "distasteful" about our
coins? I understand that many collectors have become bored with what they
consider "tired" designs on our circulating coinage, but your words indicate
a much stronger feeling on your part.
Why is it the Mint's fault that you're not receiving dollar coins? It
produces millions of them each year and distributes them to the various
regions. Why not blame merchants who never request any for their cash
registers? Or the banks that don't bother including them in change unless
specifically asked. I will agree that the designs on the dollar coins leave
me cold, but then the only time I ever see any are when I glance at my
annual proof and mint sets for damage.
The designs on our coins have nothing to do with "what our country is
capable of". The committees that select the artists and sculptors and
critique their coin design proposals should be the subject of your scorn,
along with the Congress that decides what will be produced. Although I
majored in fine arts in college, I would have a hard time figuring how to
render a national park on a quarter.
Jerry Dennis
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gotta jump in here. I saw on the news last night that the Washington
Crossing State Park in PA (across the river from Trenton NJ) is closed
due to lack of State funding. Without sounding like a radical (left
or right), national parks may not be too far behind. Maybe a quarter
with a sign that reads "Closed" on the reverse would be a good choice
for the next eleven years. Then we wouldn't have to worry about
changing designs for a while.
Jerry
mazorj
"Jerry Dennis" <JDen...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:112000a3-d0c6-4e25...@g21g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
...
< Gotta jump in here. I saw on the news last night that the Washington
Crossing State Park in PA (across the river from Trenton NJ) is closed
due to lack of State funding. Without sounding like a radical (left
or right), national parks may not be too far behind. Maybe a quarter
with a sign that reads "Closed" on the reverse would be a good choice
for the next eleven years. Then we wouldn't have to worry about
changing designs for a while.
And from the "If This Goes On" department:
When the budget cuts get bad enough, look for someone to start
counterpunching "CLOSED" on the reverse of Lincoln Memorial cents,
Monticello nickels, etc. and stamping the same on the reverse of most
currency bills.
You'll know it's time to think of emigrating when it starts happening to JFK
halves.
Jud
> Gotta jump in here. I saw on the news last night that the Washington
> Crossing State Park in PA (across the river from Trenton NJ) is closed
> due to lack of State funding. Without sounding like a radical (left
> or right), national parks may not be too far behind. Maybe a quarter
> with a sign that reads "Closed" on the reverse would be a good choice
> for the next eleven years. Then we wouldn't have to worry about
> changing designs for a while.
>
> Jerry
Worse than that, there are a number of road side rest areas here that
are closed due to lack of funding. Unfortunately, there are 2 of them
on a stretch of road where I often feel the 'call of nature'.
Jud -crossing legs, humming loudly and tapping foot-
Bruce Remick
"Jud" <numis...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:8bcc3f57-ef77-41da...@r11g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
========
I don't know if you're referring to Virginia, but VA proposed closing all
rest stops on interstate highways near built up areas. They figured
families could exit at gas stations and McDonalds to take care of business.
Fortunately, they later did an about face on this issue, perhaps after
someone described what it would look like with dozens of groaning semis
navigating for parking at each interchange oasis of fast food joints just to
take a whiz.
In a similar move, our VA county-- one of the wealthiest in the country--
proposed closing all bathrooms at county athletic and park complexes as a
cost-saving measure. No need to elaborate on how many citizens with valid
and obvious concerns showed up at the county hearing. The county
supervisors looked up and away like scolded dogs and magically found a
source of funds to cover the bathrooms.
Mike Dworetsky
It's not the material cost of the ingredients that is an unnecessary
expense, but the cost of making new ones at frequent intervals. It costs
far more to print money than to come up with the raw materials, expecially
if you replace them every few weeks (people to choose notes for retirement,
furnaces, presses, plates, cutting machines, people to handle the notes and
package them for banks, etc). I understand that the UK saved substantial
costs by changing completely to minting �1 and �2 coins (there was never a
�2 note), eliminating the need for low denomination paper. The coins are
fully accepted now and have been since shortly after introduction.
Let me check, are $2 notes now regularly used in circulation?
>
> In the US, there likely are loads of one dollar coins remaining in
> storage from 1979 that won't circulate largely because people don't
> care to use them. Nowadays, people don't handle coins often enough
> for them to wear out. Fifty years ago, it was common to receive well
> worn coins in change. Today it's common to find fifty-year-old coins
> showing minimal wear among your change, coins that would likely last
> another fifty years.
Cash is gradually on its way out but I think it will be a while yet. Those
coins were unattractive (and could be mistaken for a quarter).
Bruce Remick
I would expect the savings from dropping the $1 bill to be minimal,
considering that BEP will still be printing five or six other denominations
on the same presses. People will still be required to choose higher
denomination notes for retirement and all the other things that go with
paper money. It's hard for me to accept that in the real world the dollar
bill only lasts a few weeks. This is an "average" that seldom matches
reality.
Obviously, a dollar coin will survive in circulation much longer than a
dollar bill. I have no doubt that if the bill were eliminated, the dollar
coin would circulate much more widely than it does now. My doubts lie
mostly with the oft predicted great savings achieved by dropping the dollar
bill per se.
>
> Let me check, are $2 notes now regularly used in circulation?
Do banks have them? Many do and will provide them if asked. Will you ever
receive one in change? Highly unlikely. Are $2 notes regularly used in
circulation? No.
>
>>
>> In the US, there likely are loads of one dollar coins remaining in
>> storage from 1979 that won't circulate largely because people don't
>> care to use them. Nowadays, people don't handle coins often enough
>> for them to wear out. Fifty years ago, it was common to receive well
>> worn coins in change. Today it's common to find fifty-year-old coins
>> showing minimal wear among your change, coins that would likely last
>> another fifty years.
>
> Cash is gradually on its way out but I think it will be a while yet.
> Those coins were unattractive (and could be mistaken for a quarter).
Mike, I think that's one liklihood that the government seems to be ignoring.
Dollar coins may never wear out because they won't be handled as much in the
future as some might presume. The widely-used (clad) quarter has been
around for almost fifty years yet you will rarely encounter a truly worn
one. You're just as apt to receive a 1965 as a 2005 in change. As
inflation continues and prices rise accordingly, and with increased use of
non-cash methods of payment, the need for small denomination coins should
continue to become less of a factor.
johnnyo
Today's Video
Take a look at the high-tech, newly redesigned $100 bill.
http://whoknew.news.yahoo.com/?vid=18555857
john
sgt23
> So exactly what do you think is "unpresentable" and "distasteful" about our
> coins? I understand that many collectors have become bored with what they
> consider "tired" designs on our circulating coinage, but your words indicate
> a much stronger feeling on your part.
I personally just find the presidential dollars too be ugly. Its like
mint didn't even try when they had some make the art for these. They
should have stuck with just the Sac dollars.
> Why is it the Mint's fault that you're not receiving dollar coins? It
> produces millions of them each year and distributes them to the various
> regions. Why not blame merchants who never request any for their cash
> registers? Or the banks that don't bother including them in change unless
> specifically asked. I will agree that the designs on the dollar coins leave
> me cold, but then the only time I ever see any are when I glance at my
> annual proof and mint sets for damage.
Its not about me not getting the presidential, but everyone. They have
decided that now that banks no longer have to except these new coins,
although they want too sell too the collectors above face value, why
not give us "the collectors" the same deal they give the banks for
coins. I find the $8.95 for 2 rolls of cents that are mint for
circulation in the first place it ridiculous. Now we are suppose too
collect these new coins also at a premium. I think its about time for
a new director.
> The designs on our coins have nothing to do with "what our country is
> capable of". The committees that select the artists and sculptors and
> critique their coin design proposals should be the subject of your scorn,
> along with the Congress that decides what will be produced. Although I
> majored in fine arts in college, I would have a hard time figuring how to
> render a national park on a quarter.
I think all of the above should change. Let the people pick what they
want on the coins. This is still a free country of choice and options
right?
Bruce Remick
> So exactly what do you think is "unpresentable" and "distasteful" about
> our
> coins? I understand that many collectors have become bored with what they
> consider "tired" designs on our circulating coinage, but your words
> indicate
> a much stronger feeling on your part.
I personally just find the presidential dollars too be ugly. Its like
mint didn't even try when they had some make the art for these. They
should have stuck with just the Sac dollars.
============
Others probably feel the same way, but that doesn't make the coins
unpresentable or distasteful.
============
> Why is it the Mint's fault that you're not receiving dollar coins? It
> produces millions of them each year and distributes them to the various
> regions. Why not blame merchants who never request any for their cash
> registers? Or the banks that don't bother including them in change unless
> specifically asked. I will agree that the designs on the dollar coins
> leave
> me cold, but then the only time I ever see any are when I glance at my
> annual proof and mint sets for damage.
Its not about me not getting the presidential, but everyone. They have
decided that now that banks no longer have to except these new coins,
although they want too sell too the collectors above face value, why
not give us "the collectors" the same deal they give the banks for
coins. I find the $8.95 for 2 rolls of cents that are mint for
circulation in the first place it ridiculous. Now we are suppose too
collect these new coins also at a premium. I think its about time for
a new director.
===========
Who is "they"? Most banks take in the denominations that best serve their
local customers. The fact that the banks can't readily obtain BU solid
rolls of the latest Lincolns you want at face value isn't necessarily a
conspiracy, although the Mint (or somebody) does manage to distribute solid
BU rolls of each new presidential dollar to banks that want them.
I'm sure that if you can be patient, you'll be able to find new pennies at a
much cheaper price. Remember though, no one says you're "supposed to"
collect anything you don't want to.
===========
.
> The designs on our coins have nothing to do with "what our country is
> capable of". The committees that select the artists and sculptors and
> critique their coin design proposals should be the subject of your scorn,
> along with the Congress that decides what will be produced. Although I
> majored in fine arts in college, I would have a hard time figuring how to
> render a national park on a quarter.
I think all of the above should change. Let the people pick what they
want on the coins. This is still a free country of choice and options
right?
============
Ugh! Then we'd face what stamp collectors face. No thanks.
sgt23
> "sgt23" <bravesfandevo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I agree we don't wanna go through that, but with the good money we
spend (I hope it's still good, they do make some of it still) on these
coins. We should demand better, just my opinion!
Bruce Remick
==========
Keep in mind, for most people money is simply for spending, not as a work of
art. When was the last time you paused to admire, or even notice, the stamp
on a letter sent to you?
mazorj
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:LRxEn.164463$y13....@newsfe12.iad...
...
> Keep in mind, for most people money is simply for spending, not as a work
> of art. When was the last time you paused to admire, or even notice, the
> stamp on a letter sent to you?
As someone who habitually checks change, I do notice stamps. More than 95%
of my mail has either a pre-printed postage insignia or those crappy
pre-sorted bulk mail "stamps," which is why I tend to notice "real" stamps.
Although I buy the uninspiring flag rolls of 100 for home use, occasionally
I'll pick up a sheet of a design that catches my eye. I use those for
friends and family. Dunno how many of them notice or care, it just gives me
a bit of pleasure to share my find.
There are websites, like zazzle.com, where you can print electronic postage
imprints as "stamps" with art work of your own design. I'm sure that some
of them are quite creative, but Lord knows what kind of crappy or sappy
graphics get put on those. Pet dogs, cats, baby pics, ad nauseam. It would
be funny, though, to have a cartoon of a snail. Or a close-up of some
extraordinarily rare stamp. Ooh! Ooh! If it's an alimony check, put
something insulting about your ex, or better yet, "Caution: Anthrax" with
the biohazard graphic. The same works for bill payments, too. :-)