If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"note.boy" wrote in message ... "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... "note.boy" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... "Real" money, meaning that the value of the coin is in the metal, is gone now. Was the USA the last country to coin real money? If not, which country carried on coinage after LBJ eliminated silver coinage? BTW, I do not count legal tender coins like the US $50 gold coin, as it is not expected to be circulated as a Kennedy half dollar was. GFH I would not be surprised if the USA was the last country to coin "real" money as they have the most backward coin and papermoney on the planet. So, you've rigorously examined the coin and papermoney of all nations on the planet and come to this conclusion, eh? Mr. Jaggers Prove me wrong by naming a non third world country that has a more backward coin and papermoney set up. By whose standards (besides yours) is our monetary system "backward"? Who else has ridiculously low face value coins and papermoney in circulation similar to the one cent coin and the one dollar note? The dollar bill has a ridiculously low face value? Regardless, if any other countries use low value coins it's because they want to. Better not go there if it bugs you. The UK got rid of the 1/2p coin (roughly equal to the one cent coin) in 1984 and last issued the ten bob note (roughly equal to the one dollar note) in 1967. So what? They did so because they wanted to. I believe the UK still has 50p coins, two of which equate to a one pound coin. Why mint both? People like to use them, I guess. Same here. The USA is 23 and 40 years behind the UK. Wow! Did you get this from a US or a UK economist? The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. Billy Personally, I kind of like having all my bills the same size so none get lost in between the others and I don't have to keep them arranged by size in my wallet. Never in 60 years have I confused one denomination with another. I think our bills look just fine, too, pretty much the way our money has looked for well over half a century. Gives consumers confidence and comfort. Frequent currency design changes can create confusion. Any time I can buy $1.00 worth of goods with $1.00 worth of the coins in my pocket, that's "real money" to me. I couldn't care less what the coins are made of. Bruce Bruce |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"Jeff R." wrote in message ... wrote in message ps.com... I agree with all of these points, but the USA (except for gold coins minted prior to 1933) has never demonitized any of its currency. It is all still good! The USA is understandably reluctant to break this policy. How to introduce the US $ 1.- coin without demontizing the US$ 1.- bill. That is the problem no one has solved. Can you? GFH Just stop printing them. They wear out pretty fast. Before long they'll be effectively out of circulation and will represent just an occasional nuisance at the register. Witness the "found in change" threads. Hehe. They'll start a whole new round of "this dopey young store clerk refused to take my $1 notes - called the manager... (etc.)" threads. After a few years everyone will wonder what the fuss was about. Here in Australia, the complete changeover was measured in months, not years. I'm still gobsmacked at how quickly the paper $1 and $2 disappeared. -- Jeff R. The public doesn't always choose the most efficient combinations of bills and coins. If they did, our 50¢ and $2 bill would be used more. They're still available but people choose to use two quarters or two ones. Bruce |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"Jeff R." wrote in message u... "note.boy" wrote in message ... I would not be surprised if the USA was the last country to coin "real" money as they have the most backward coin and papermoney on the planet. ... Why are all the notes the one colour and size regardless of denomination as this must make the sorting of notes difficult. Why do the notes have little in the way of security features which makes forgery easier. As the congresscritters for the answer. Billy Tend to agree, Billy. Judging by the responses over the years, in this NG, to the proposal that the 1¢ be dropped, I'd suggest that our US cousins would tend to be a little more conservative (read "ornery", "stubborn"...) than most of the rest of the globe, particularly in terms of "fixing something what ain't broke!" I doubt we have a monopoly on that view. We've actually never been challenged recently to accept a significant monetary "fix". We've always been left with multiple options. The degree of being "broke", of course, is debatable. (As is the relative virtue of this character trait.) I'm guessing here, but maybe too many 'Merkins have fond memories (anecdotes, stories) of "what Granpaw did with that penny" (etc. etc.) for them to allow that tangible piece of history to be summarily eliminated. (And rounding will result in runaway inflation for decades to come.) I'd prefer to think that most 'merkins simply don't care about the look or their money. When there's a design change, there's a buzz for the first year, then no one cares anymore. The American public has not clamored for or had to deal with a significant change in coin denomination since the half cent, two cent and three cent coins were discontinued. The 20¢ coin wasn't around long enough to create a fan base. The history of those coins remains for anyone who wants to own (or even spend) one. When silver dollars were eliminated few were using them anyway To give them their credit, they are making a half-hearted, and wishy-washy attempt to introduce some colour (sorry: "color") into their notes. Too little, too late, too slow. The more colors, details, frequent changes, the harder it becomes for a merchant do detect a counterfeit. But by the same token, the more familiar the design, like with our US currency, the more the merchant tends to become oblivious to the design. Either way may work or not for a given country. I kinda like the vignettes on some of their notes, 'though: The spooky pyramid and eye on the $1, the founding fathers on the $2. The architecture lessons on the others get a bit dull. Making them all the same size has got be a bit silly. We've grown to like them all the same size. Easier to count and spot the denomination on the corner. None get lost or hidden in the wallet. I will say that on my last trip to the UK, after a few days I go used to arranging the bills according to size in my (too small) wallet. I especially liked the one and two pound coins. I could pick them out of my pocket change by feel after a few days. I'd like to see a thick dollar and/or two dollar coin like that here instead of what we've got. Bruce |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:42:54 -0800, "Bruce Remick"
wrote: "note.boy" wrote in message ... "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... "note.boy" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... "Real" money, meaning that the value of the coin is in the metal, is gone now. Was the USA the last country to coin real money? If not, which country carried on coinage after LBJ eliminated silver coinage? BTW, I do not count legal tender coins like the US $50 gold coin, as it is not expected to be circulated as a Kennedy half dollar was. GFH I would not be surprised if the USA was the last country to coin "real" money as they have the most backward coin and papermoney on the planet. So, you've rigorously examined the coin and papermoney of all nations on the planet and come to this conclusion, eh? Mr. Jaggers Prove me wrong by naming a non third world country that has a more backward coin and papermoney set up. By whose standards (besides yours) is our monetary system "backward"? Well, mine (US near DC) for one. A lot of other RCCers share this assessment, witnessed by the countless "let's see how we can improve the US's money set-up", "get rid of the penny/cent!" and "get rid of the paper dollar" threads over the last decade at least. Who else has ridiculously low face value coins and papermoney in circulation similar to the one cent coin and the one dollar note? The dollar bill has a ridiculously low face value? When compared with the set-ups of most other countries in the world, yes. Most countries' smallest valued note is 5.00, some probably 10.00. Also when one considers the buying power of a note, the $1 is pretty small compared to how it used to be. Even in my lifetime, I've seen what could be bought for a dollar in the late 1970s compared with what _can't_ be bought for a dollar anymore. Or even two or three dollars. He also mentioned "coins" in there. The penny and nickel are ridiculously low valued when compared with the prices of just about anything in the USA. There's hardly anything of any size or content that can be bought for a quarter -- how much less is the power of a nickel or penny except in accumulation. If it weren't for the rise in copper and nickel prices, those two coins would continue on their rapid course towards irrelevance. Regardless, if any other countries use low value coins it's because they want to. Better not go there if it bugs you. I daresay the coins and notes themselves don't bug him. What seems to be bugging him is what is bugging a lot of people: the nonsense and primitivity of the present system! The UK got rid of the 1/2p coin (roughly equal to the one cent coin) in 1984 and last issued the ten bob note (roughly equal to the one dollar note) in 1967. So what? They did so because they wanted to. I believe the UK still has 50p coins, two of which equate to a one pound coin. Why mint both? People like to use them, I guess. Same here. Not quite like here. That 50p coin _replaced_ an older, increasingly lower valued note. That was the whole point! The USA is 23 and 40 years behind the UK. Wow! Did you get this from a US or a UK economist? A simple calculator will do. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. Billy Personally, I kind of like having all my bills the same size so none get lost in between the others and I don't have to keep them arranged by size in my wallet. Personally I agree with this sentiment, though I tend to shove the things into my pocket rather than neatly folding them in my wallet. I'm curious, though: do you have a trifold wallet? Never in 60 years have I confused one denomination with another. Good for you that your eyes have not yet gone blind! Not that there are many blind people when compared to the population as a whole, but differing sizes do help them live a little more independently. And what's more American than livining an independent lifestyle? I think our bills look just fine, too, pretty much the way our money has looked for well over half a century. Yeah. They were uninspired in 1928, too! If we could see some truly amazing designs, I wouldn't care if they were all green and the same size! Gives consumers confidence and comfort. This is true. The good old greenbacks have a good reputation worldwide in part because of their distinctive sameness, both across denominations and through time. Frequent currency design changes can create confusion. It can. But Americans had no trouble with all the design changes that were witnessed in earlier decades. Padraic Any time I can buy $1.00 worth of goods with $1.00 worth of the coins in my pocket, that's "real money" to me. I couldn't care less what the coins are made of. Bruce Bruce -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"e" wrote in message news In article .com, "kathy1945" wrote: Boy, some of you guys are real money snobs. The U.S. bills and coins are primarily here to serve the purpose of commerce, and they work pretty well. So what if a lot of them aren't worthy of framing. That's only a secondary consideration. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. i would like a list of countrys where american $100 bills won't be snatched up eagerly. 1) Australia. ('cause I'd lose AUD$8 exchanging it for real spending money) Anybody else? -- Jeff R. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
Here's the solution. Stop printing $1 notes,and flood the market with a
SMALLER reasonably-sized coin, something just larger than a nickel, with a milled edge. The one-dollar bills in circulation will slowly wear out and eventually disappear Tony. wrote in message ps.com... On Jan 27, 4:22 pm, "note.boy" wrote: "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in ... Mr. JaggersProve me wrong by naming a non third world country that has a more backward coin and papermoney set up. Who else has ridiculously low face value coins and papermoney in circulation similar to the one cent coin and the one dollar note? The UK got rid of the 1/2p coin (roughly equal to the one cent coin) in 1984 and last issued the ten bob note (roughly equal to the one dollar note) in 1967. The USA is 23 and 40 years behind the UK. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. I agree with all of these points, but the USA (except for gold coins minted prior to 1933) has never demonitized any of its currency. It is all still good! The USA is understandably reluctant to break this policy. How to introduce the US $ 1.- coin without demontizing the US$ 1.- bill. That is the problem no one has solved. Can you? GFH ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
One point that it seems everybody has missed is the USE of the 1,5 and
10-cent coins. By themselves, they can buy nothing, but they are necessary to make change. Tony "Padraic Brown" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:42:54 -0800, "Bruce Remick" wrote: "note.boy" wrote in message ... "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... "note.boy" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... "Real" money, meaning that the value of the coin is in the metal, is gone now. Was the USA the last country to coin real money? If not, which country carried on coinage after LBJ eliminated silver coinage? BTW, I do not count legal tender coins like the US $50 gold coin, as it is not expected to be circulated as a Kennedy half dollar was. GFH I would not be surprised if the USA was the last country to coin "real" money as they have the most backward coin and papermoney on the planet. So, you've rigorously examined the coin and papermoney of all nations on the planet and come to this conclusion, eh? Mr. Jaggers Prove me wrong by naming a non third world country that has a more backward coin and papermoney set up. By whose standards (besides yours) is our monetary system "backward"? Well, mine (US near DC) for one. A lot of other RCCers share this assessment, witnessed by the countless "let's see how we can improve the US's money set-up", "get rid of the penny/cent!" and "get rid of the paper dollar" threads over the last decade at least. Who else has ridiculously low face value coins and papermoney in circulation similar to the one cent coin and the one dollar note? The dollar bill has a ridiculously low face value? When compared with the set-ups of most other countries in the world, yes. Most countries' smallest valued note is 5.00, some probably 10.00. Also when one considers the buying power of a note, the $1 is pretty small compared to how it used to be. Even in my lifetime, I've seen what could be bought for a dollar in the late 1970s compared with what _can't_ be bought for a dollar anymore. Or even two or three dollars. He also mentioned "coins" in there. The penny and nickel are ridiculously low valued when compared with the prices of just about anything in the USA. There's hardly anything of any size or content that can be bought for a quarter -- how much less is the power of a nickel or penny except in accumulation. If it weren't for the rise in copper and nickel prices, those two coins would continue on their rapid course towards irrelevance. Regardless, if any other countries use low value coins it's because they want to. Better not go there if it bugs you. I daresay the coins and notes themselves don't bug him. What seems to be bugging him is what is bugging a lot of people: the nonsense and primitivity of the present system! The UK got rid of the 1/2p coin (roughly equal to the one cent coin) in 1984 and last issued the ten bob note (roughly equal to the one dollar note) in 1967. So what? They did so because they wanted to. I believe the UK still has 50p coins, two of which equate to a one pound coin. Why mint both? People like to use them, I guess. Same here. Not quite like here. That 50p coin _replaced_ an older, increasingly lower valued note. That was the whole point! The USA is 23 and 40 years behind the UK. Wow! Did you get this from a US or a UK economist? A simple calculator will do. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. Billy Personally, I kind of like having all my bills the same size so none get lost in between the others and I don't have to keep them arranged by size in my wallet. Personally I agree with this sentiment, though I tend to shove the things into my pocket rather than neatly folding them in my wallet. I'm curious, though: do you have a trifold wallet? Never in 60 years have I confused one denomination with another. Good for you that your eyes have not yet gone blind! Not that there are many blind people when compared to the population as a whole, but differing sizes do help them live a little more independently. And what's more American than livining an independent lifestyle? I think our bills look just fine, too, pretty much the way our money has looked for well over half a century. Yeah. They were uninspired in 1928, too! If we could see some truly amazing designs, I wouldn't care if they were all green and the same size! Gives consumers confidence and comfort. This is true. The good old greenbacks have a good reputation worldwide in part because of their distinctive sameness, both across denominations and through time. Frequent currency design changes can create confusion. It can. But Americans had no trouble with all the design changes that were witnessed in earlier decades. Padraic Any time I can buy $1.00 worth of goods with $1.00 worth of the coins in my pocket, that's "real money" to me. I couldn't care less what the coins are made of. Bruce Bruce -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"Padraic Brown" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:42:54 -0800, "Bruce Remick" wrote: "note.boy" wrote in message ... "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... "note.boy" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... "Real" money, meaning that the value of the coin is in the metal, is gone now. Was the USA the last country to coin real money? If not, which country carried on coinage after LBJ eliminated silver coinage? BTW, I do not count legal tender coins like the US $50 gold coin, as it is not expected to be circulated as a Kennedy half dollar was. GFH I would not be surprised if the USA was the last country to coin "real" money as they have the most backward coin and papermoney on the planet. So, you've rigorously examined the coin and papermoney of all nations on the planet and come to this conclusion, eh? Mr. Jaggers Prove me wrong by naming a non third world country that has a more backward coin and papermoney set up. By whose standards (besides yours) is our monetary system "backward"? Well, mine (US near DC) for one. A lot of other RCCers share this assessment, witnessed by the countless "let's see how we can improve the US's money set-up", "get rid of the penny/cent!" and "get rid of the paper dollar" threads over the last decade at least. So are you saying that discussions on RCC indicate our monetary system is backward relative to other countries? I agree with a lot of the points in these RCC discussions, but I doubt the public considers our system backwards. Who else has ridiculously low face value coins and papermoney in circulation similar to the one cent coin and the one dollar note? The dollar bill has a ridiculously low face value? When compared with the set-ups of most other countries in the world, yes. Most countries' smallest valued note is 5.00, some probably 10.00. Also when one considers the buying power of a note, the $1 is pretty small compared to how it used to be. Even in my lifetime, I've seen what could be bought for a dollar in the late 1970s compared with what _can't_ be bought for a dollar anymore. Or even two or three dollars. Still, people LIKE the dollar bill. More even than a dollar coin. When they use these bills, they don't wonder what people in other countries are using. When they discuss what a dollar used to buy, they're not yearning for a more modern monetary system. The public decides what coins and bills it prefers to use. What can be bought with them has no bearing, or else we would abolish minor coins altogether because you can't buy much with them. He also mentioned "coins" in there. The penny and nickel are ridiculously low valued when compared with the prices of just about anything in the USA. There's hardly anything of any size or content that can be bought for a quarter -- how much less is the power of a nickel or penny except in accumulation. If it weren't for the rise in copper and nickel prices, those two coins would continue on their rapid course towards irrelevance. Sure, they have little value. But until some laws change, they're required to make change. The public accepts this so there's no outcry to change things. Regardless, if any other countries use low value coins it's because they want to. Better not go there if it bugs you. I daresay the coins and notes themselves don't bug him. What seems to be bugging him is what is bugging a lot of people: the nonsense and primitivity of the present system! I guess the premise that our monetary system is primitive and nonsensical because it's not the same as other countries or the way foreigners think it should be structured is pretty flimsy, IMO. I suppose I could examine the monetary system of some other countries and question its rationale. None of my business, really. I don't live there or appreciate the needs of commerce or feelings of the people. Our system is designed for the use and convenience of the public. They/we/I seem to like or accept it. If folks from other countries feel their system is great and better than ours, fine. Enjoy it. Aside from coin collectors, most of us here seem to enjoy things the way they are. Modifications will be accepted if they are forthcoming. The UK got rid of the 1/2p coin (roughly equal to the one cent coin) in 1984 and last issued the ten bob note (roughly equal to the one dollar note) in 1967. So what? They did so because they wanted to. I believe the UK still has 50p coins, two of which equate to a one pound coin. Why mint both? People like to use them, I guess. Same here. Not quite like here. That 50p coin _replaced_ an older, increasingly lower valued note. That was the whole point! It's simply the peoples' choice. In the US, we might have preferred to use two 50p coins instead of a pound coin, leaving the pound coin to languish. Like we now prefer to use two quarters instead of one half dollar. You can't say one country is more "backward" than another with its monetary system without addressing what the people of that country prefer to use in their daily commerce. The USA is 23 and 40 years behind the UK. Wow! Did you get this from a US or a UK economist? A simple calculator will do. There's no key for "behindness" or "elitist quotient" on my calculator. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. Billy Personally, I kind of like having all my bills the same size so none get lost in between the others and I don't have to keep them arranged by size in my wallet. Personally I agree with this sentiment, though I tend to shove the things into my pocket rather than neatly folding them in my wallet. I'm curious, though: do you have a trifold wallet? Yes. But it wasn't quite big enough to hide the bills in the UK. If I were staying longer, I would have bought a wallet to accommodate that currency. Never in 60 years have I confused one denomination with another. Good for you that your eyes have not yet gone blind! Not that there are many blind people when compared to the population as a whole, but differing sizes do help them live a little more independently. And what's more American than livining an independent lifestyle? If I ever get to the point where I can't read the 1, 5, 10, or 20 on the corner, or recognize the individual on the bill, my wife won't let me out of the house with money anymore. I agree that different size bills should be easier for blind people, but I do recall reading that, for whatever reason, many blind people are not among those clamoring for the size change recently proposed here. I think our bills look just fine, too, pretty much the way our money has looked for well over half a century. Yeah. They were uninspired in 1928, too! If we could see some truly amazing designs, I wouldn't care if they were all green and the same size! I wasn't aware that our money is supposed to be inspirational. Oh as a collector, maybe. But the guy down the street doesn't even look beyond that corner number. Gives consumers confidence and comfort. This is true. The good old greenbacks have a good reputation worldwide in part because of their distinctive sameness, both across denominations and through time. That was all I was saying. Frequent currency design changes can create confusion. It can. But Americans had no trouble with all the design changes that were witnessed in earlier decades. I can't attest to whether Americans had trouble with our early bill designs, or which ones they might have actually encountered in everyday shopping. But it had to be confusing based on the size of my old Criswell reference. Bruce |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Real" Money
"Jeff R." wrote in message u... "e" wrote in message news In article .com, "kathy1945" wrote: Boy, some of you guys are real money snobs. The U.S. bills and coins are primarily here to serve the purpose of commerce, and they work pretty well. So what if a lot of them aren't worthy of framing. That's only a secondary consideration. The attractiveness of current USA papermoney from a collecting point of view is a million miles behind Scottish notes. We have very attractive issues in a variety of designs/colours and sizes from three different banks that change fairly regularly. i would like a list of countrys where american $100 bills won't be snatched up eagerly. 1) Australia. ('cause I'd lose AUD$8 exchanging it for real spending money) Anybody else? -- Jeff R. Actually, the US $100 probably is a poor choice because of the counterfeit threat-- perceived and/or real. In the 1990's, before the latest design change, US overseas travelers choosing to carrying cash were advised to bring US $50 rather than $100 because many banks and currency exchanges were not accepting the $100. Too many "supernote" counterfeit $100's at the time. Even with the design change, that US $100 uneasiness is still out there in some places. I will gladly snatch up any US$100 if I can do so legally, like in smashing a piñata or something. Bruce |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MAKEING MONEY WITH ONLY 6 DOLLARS | eric l | Paper Money | 0 | October 23rd 05 06:00 AM |
Make alot of money, FAST! LEGALLY | [email protected] | Books | 2 | February 27th 05 01:20 AM |
Need Cash For Your Hobby | sirray | Football (US) | 0 | January 17th 05 08:05 PM |
money money money | mhsrulz07 | Paper Money | 0 | December 27th 04 08:11 AM |
A WAY TO MAKE EASY MONEY | anita moore | Paper Money | 0 | December 21st 04 02:33 AM |