No More Presidential Dollars?

Not that old canard. :-) Every study shows that if you mention (just mention) "A dollar bill costs 9 cents to make and lasts 22 months in circulation, where a dollar coin costs 20 cents to make, and will last 30-50 years," people want to make the switch 2 to 1. If you conveniently leave out this matter, people will choose the bill 2 to 1. It's the fact that they're durable and save money which is the spoonfull of sugar that makes the medicine go down.

I'd also look favorably upon polymer notes for whatever bills we produce, provided the polymer can be sourced from something other than petroleum (which is doable and cost effective). However, the drawbacks are that they only last about 4 times longer than paper, cost twice as much to produce (given the cheapest and dirtiest process), and become brittle with prolonged exposure to sunlight. Where they are recyclable (huge plus over our current notes! I emphasize that), coins *still* outlast them by many decades.

(On a related note about the durability of coins, I received a 1946 nickel in my change today at Costco. Blows my mind that it's been circulating for nearly 70 years. I also received another three blasted 1964 nickels, which next year shall turn 50. They shall outlast *me.*)

Matchbox, you beat me to what I was going to say. I am sick of dead presidents on our dollar coins, although I like dollar coins. The Native American designs are so much better and I like the one-year reverse designs.

As noted, this bill is dead. From the article...





The legislation is ambiguous. Reading it one way, Carter could be skipped to get to Reagan, reading it another, it has to end with Ford. I have always held that when the time comes, something will be passed to remove the ambiguity.

National Security Advisors?




oh cmon this is the moment to shine for guys like, grover cleveland, warren g harding, and herbert hoover.

Throwing something into this discussion:

I read here on the CCF that John Kerry* is from the county where the bill-paper-making company is located, and that it's in large part due to them lobbying him to keep the $1 bill that we still have it.

Sometime this month he will be leaving the Senate.

Anybody want to speculate on what this may or may not do to our currency's current format? Anything, nothing, lots of things?



*about whom I am sure we all have strong feelings pro or con or otherwise, so let's just leave this to bare facts, if we can, lest we get canned into General Discussion again. I will, however, not object to anybody saying he has a horse face. Sorry, Senator, you do indeed have a horse face.

Company is based in Mass, but will the incoming Senators be from that county, or close to it? I would think they'd feel the stronger "ties of kinship" to a company close to them than one all the way across the state. There's clout and there's also this to consider . . . .


. . . . lobbying = $$$. These incoming Senators will not have been from big, multimillion dollar elections where lobbyists also have lots of clout. They'll be appointed. Will that tie be there without the pocket-lining?

I doesn't matter if they live in the same county, or in one all the way across the state, the company is in THEIR state and it is the only company that produces the paper for the currency. It means jobs in their state and they will tend to protect it. After all the Senators will probably want to get re-elected and they will want that lobbyist money. They aren't beholden to them now, but would be perfectly happy to become beholden to them in the future.