It is interesting how culturally relevant our legal tender is. I find that the whole concept of money is so abstract, but we all know "what it is". Now a new plan to make a dollar coin more culturally acceptable- or is it just a way for the Treasury to make money, so to speak? Eliminating dollar bills -paper- would save $500 million in printing costs. Those things get worn out you know. But the NY Times reports that the issue would "earn" money, with collectors taking coins out of circulation. The State Quarters series have taken $5 Billion out of circulation since 1999. So is it for the convenience of the people or the botom line of the Treasury? And can we easily change our currency?
8 comments:
For me, dollar coins would be more convenient than dollar bills, but I understand the complaint for men who carry money in their pockets, one of those clip things, and even mens wallets typically don't have a spot for coins. The fact that it would save the government $500 million a year overrides this slight invconvenience, however. Since the government tends to spend large amounts of money in general, any bit saved off the deficit is always a good thing, especially for something as simple as switching from paper to coin. As for the acceptance of the coin, this would probably only be possible of the dollar bills were taken out of circulation, since people tend to be stubborn and past attempts at dollar coins have failed miserably- I have a few Sacagewea coins sitting in a drawer somewhere, but I honestly cacn say I never bought anything with one. The popularity of the state coins is an interesting argument, but will just lead people to buy those little pamphlet things and stick the new president coins in them, not actually use the currency. I think the switch to coins should be made, but if it isn't I wouldn't be all that bothered.
I already don't like having change so carrying around dollar coins instead of paper would be bad for me. I think we should just get rid of the concept of carrying currency around all together like that commercial where the guy pulls out money and everything that was working so well gets stopped. It just seems like it would be so much more convient to use a credit system. But as for these coins i do not like the idea of having bulkier currency. The paper dollar seems to be working and the treasury can keep printing money without to much inconvience so if we dont go to credit we should stay with the paper money.
I also agree with malrye because i would loose coins more often and at a glance take aquarter instead. paper money is fine and i hate coins anyway. i know it would save the treasury money but coins would definatly be an incovoince to the people and not much to the treasury.
The new golden president dollars isn't a bad idea for our economy. As Alex said anything to save the government $500 million is helpful for our deficit in spending. The NY Times article mentioned that the government earned 4-5 billion dollars from the state quarters. If proportions work correctly, the government could expect to earn 16-20 billion dollars. I think this is more of a convenience of the Treasury, not the people. I don't think that people are going to want to carry around more coins instead of bills. I wouldn't. The currency can probably be changed easily, it is getting used to a new currency that could take time-the success of the Euro when it hasn't even been in the European nations for a long time. If the government decided to make only coins, then we would obviously have to either get used to it, or we would see an increase in credit card users and checks. Mr. Rood, I bet you that Harding and Harrison will also be very popular ones along with Filmore.
The proposal is definitely something to think about. Money saving techniques are welcomed as long as they outweigh the costs. In this case there is an inconvenience since coined money can be cumbersome to carry. The change would be very hard because it would cause culture shock. As a male I am not ready to exchange my wallet for a purse. A pure credit system would eliminate printing costs, but I am not sure if that is the best thing for our society. I feel it is better to see the money you have because you can keep better track of it that way. Spending money is easier when you don't have to see the paper leave your pocket.
Mr. Rood- did you see the Daily Show segment on the push for seeing-impaired friendly money? Besides being funny as always, I also found it strange that almost all other economically significant countries have different size tender, yet, we still do not. Is there an actual reason behind our identical bills?
i think the coins would be more of a money maker for the treasury because of all the coin collecting. take the golden dollar you don't see too many people carrying those around instead of paper dollars. most of the time you see collectors with them or the occational vending machine giving you one back as change. so i don't think the coins would be that good off an idea and who wants to carry all that change around with them any way
The only reason that we don't have seeing impaired cash is that it would cost more to produce. I will look for the Daily Show clip.
Post a Comment