On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:31 +0100,  wrote:

>"Hugh Brodie"  wrote in message 
>news:ZKGdnURP4qoCEMfVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> Speaking of hyper-inflation, it's fun looking at the website of the 
>> Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe  http://www.rbz.co.zw to see the daily exchange 
>> rate of the $Z vs the $US. Yesterday, it was 5,817,000,000; today it's 
>> 6,718,000,000. They have just issued $Z 50,000,000,000 notes ("bearer 
>> cheques"). And it will cost you $Z 1,800,000,000 to mail a postcard to the 
>> US. http://www.zimpost.co.zw/postalrates.html
>>
>
>It's a shame that there are no images of currently circulating Zimbabwean 
>notes or coins.
>
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4266.html
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/worlds-most-worthless-currencies.html
http://www.neatorama.com/category/money-finance/page/2/
The latter also has a 100,000 USD note.
http://stores.ebay.com.sg/Roberts-World-Money-Store-and-More_W0QQcolZ2QQdirZQ2d1QQftidZ2QQtZkm

"Charles Ellson"  wrote in message 
news:89tl545ro3oqcetamsf098ded813g7tcgn@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:31 +0100,  wrote:
>
>>"Hugh Brodie"  wrote in message
>>news:ZKGdnURP4qoCEMfVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> Speaking of hyper-inflation, it's fun looking at the website of the
>>> Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe  http://www.rbz.co.zw to see the daily exchange
>>> rate of the $Z vs the $US. Yesterday, it was 5,817,000,000; today it's
>>> 6,718,000,000. They have just issued $Z 50,000,000,000 notes ("bearer
>>> cheques"). And it will cost you $Z 1,800,000,000 to mail a postcard to 
>>> the
>>> US. http://www.zimpost.co.zw/postalrates.html
>>>
>>
>>It's a shame that there are no images of currently circulating Zimbabwean
>>notes or coins.
>>
> http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4266.html
> http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/worlds-most-worthless-currencies.html
> http://www.neatorama.com/category/money-finance/page/2/
> The latter also has a 100,000 USD note.
> http://stores.ebay.com.sg/Roberts-World-Money-Store-and-More_W0QQcolZ2QQdirZQ2d1QQftidZ2QQtZkm

Many thanks for that.

Wouldn't it be illegal to sell a 100,000-dollar note, however? They are not 
intended for general circulation and I wonder if the relevant US authorities 
would have something to say about that.

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:42:05 +0100,  wrote:

>
>"Charles Ellson"  wrote in message 
>news:89tl545ro3oqcetamsf098ded813g7tcgn@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:31 +0100,  wrote:
>>
>>>"Hugh Brodie"  wrote in message
>>>news:ZKGdnURP4qoCEMfVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of hyper-inflation, it's fun looking at the website of the
>>>> Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe  http://www.rbz.co.zw to see the daily exchange
>>>> rate of the $Z vs the $US. Yesterday, it was 5,817,000,000; today it's
>>>> 6,718,000,000. They have just issued $Z 50,000,000,000 notes ("bearer
>>>> cheques"). And it will cost you $Z 1,800,000,000 to mail a postcard to 
>>>> the
>>>> US. http://www.zimpost.co.zw/postalrates.html
>>>>
>>>
>>>It's a shame that there are no images of currently circulating Zimbabwean
>>>notes or coins.
>>>
>> http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4266.html
>> http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/worlds-most-worthless-currencies.html
>> http://www.neatorama.com/category/money-finance/page/2/
>> The latter also has a 100,000 USD note.
>> http://stores.ebay.com.sg/Roberts-World-Money-Store-and-More_W0QQcolZ2QQdirZQ2d1QQftidZ2QQtZkm
>
>Many thanks for that.
>
>Wouldn't it be illegal to sell a 100,000-dollar note, however? They are not 
>intended for general circulation and I wonder if the relevant US authorities 
>would have something to say about that. 
>
The one that I'm looking at ATM (on-line, not in my hand!) does not
seem to have any such restriction :-
http://tinyurl.com/3xs6hh (www.purpleslinky.com)
and is "Payable to Bearer". It looks as if while there was no
intention for them to "escape" into general circulation they were
still printed as currency.
As long as there is the correct amount of gold/cowrie shells/whatever
to back a note then there should be no practical reason to worry about
them getting into public hands.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> "Charles Ellson"  wrote in message 
> news:89tl545ro3oqcetamsf098ded813g7tcgn@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:31 +0100,  wrote:
>>
>>> "Hugh Brodie"  wrote in message
>>> news:ZKGdnURP4qoCEMfVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> Speaking of hyper-inflation, it's fun looking at the website of the
>>>> Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe  http://www.rbz.co.zw to see the daily exchange
>>>> rate of the $Z vs the $US. Yesterday, it was 5,817,000,000; today it's
>>>> 6,718,000,000. They have just issued $Z 50,000,000,000 notes ("bearer
>>>> cheques"). And it will cost you $Z 1,800,000,000 to mail a postcard to 
>>>> the
>>>> US. http://www.zimpost.co.zw/postalrates.html
>>>>
>>> It's a shame that there are no images of currently circulating Zimbabwean
>>> notes or coins.
>>>
>> http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4266.html
>> http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/worlds-most-worthless-currencies.html
>> http://www.neatorama.com/category/money-finance/page/2/
>> The latter also has a 100,000 USD note.
>> http://stores.ebay.com.sg/Roberts-World-Money-Store-and-More_W0QQcolZ2QQdirZQ2d1QQftidZ2QQtZkm
> 
> Many thanks for that.
> 
> Wouldn't it be illegal to sell a 100,000-dollar note, however? They are not 
> intended for general circulation and I wonder if the relevant US authorities 
> would have something to say about that. 

For starters, the US authorities have something to say about any cash 
transaction larger than USD5,000, due to money laundering (and now 
"terrorism") laws regardless of the size of the individual bills.

USD10,000 and 100,000 bills were only issued to the Federal Reserve 
Banks as a way to transfer money between themselves (much easier than 
shipping gold) and were not circulated _at all_.  According to the 
authorities, all were accounted for and all were destroyed except a few 
that were lent (not given or sold) to museums.  It is supposedly 
impossible for a person to acquire a legitimate one legally, so if such 
a bill were presented to a bank, the person would be arrested for either 
counterfeiting or theft.

Now, if it turns out that any of those bills _did_ get into circulation 
and had been hoarded for eight-plus decades without detection, a bank 
would be required to accept it for deposit (the US never demonetizes old 
currency or coins), but they could not give it out to another customer 
for a withdrawal.  They would send the bill to their Federal Reserve 
Bank, which would undoubtedly destroy it immediately.  That is exactly 
what would happen to the remaining USD1000 bills that are out there, but 
nobody sane would ever present them to a bank because they're worth more 
as collectibles than as money, just like old silver and gold coins that 
are now worth many times their face value.

This is decidedly different than what happens to (relatively rare) USD2 
bills, which banks accept without comment but only give out to customers 
upon specific request.  Banks also hoard USD50 and USD100 bills, but 
they'll ask if you want them if your withdrawal is large ("Do you want 
that in hundreds or twenties?").

S

>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> "Charles Ellson"  wrote in message 
>> news:89tl545ro3oqcetamsf098ded813g7tcgn@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:31 +0100,  wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Hugh Brodie"  wrote in message
>>>> news:ZKGdnURP4qoCEMfVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>> Speaking of hyper-inflation, it's fun looking at the website of the
>>>>> Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe  http://www.rbz.co.zw to see the daily exchange
>>>>> rate of the $Z vs the $US. Yesterday, it was 5,817,000,000; today it's
>>>>> 6,718,000,000. They have just issued $Z 50,000,000,000 notes ("bearer
>>>>> cheques"). And it will cost you $Z 1,800,000,000 to mail a postcard to 
>>>>> the
>>>>> US. http://www.zimpost.co.zw/postalrates.html
>>>>>
>>>> It's a shame that there are no images of currently circulating Zimbabwean
>>>> notes or coins.
>>>>
>>> http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4266.html
>>> http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/worlds-most-worthless-currencies.html
>>> http://www.neatorama.com/category/money-finance/page/2/
>>> The latter also has a 100,000 USD note.
>>> http://stores.ebay.com.sg/Roberts-World-Money-Store-and-More_W0QQcolZ2QQdirZQ2d1QQftidZ2QQtZkm
>> 
>> Many thanks for that.
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be illegal to sell a 100,000-dollar note, however? They are not 
>> intended for general circulation and I wonder if the relevant US authorities 
>> would have something to say about that. 
>
>For starters, the US authorities have something to say about any cash 
>transaction larger than USD5,000, due to money laundering (and now 
>"terrorism") laws regardless of the size of the individual bills.
>
>USD10,000 and 100,000 bills were only issued to the Federal Reserve 
>Banks as a way to transfer money between themselves (much easier than 
>shipping gold) and were not circulated _at all_.  According to the 
>authorities, all were accounted for and all were destroyed except a few 
>that were lent (not given or sold) to museums.  It is supposedly 
>impossible for a person to acquire a legitimate one legally, so if such 
>a bill were presented to a bank, the person would be arrested for either 
>counterfeiting or theft.
>
>Now, if it turns out that any of those bills _did_ get into circulation 
>and had been hoarded for eight-plus decades without detection, a bank 
>would be required to accept it for deposit (the US never demonetizes old 
>currency or coins), but they could not give it out to another customer 
>for a withdrawal.  They would send the bill to their Federal Reserve 
>Bank, which would undoubtedly destroy it immediately.  That is exactly 
>what would happen to the remaining USD1000 bills that are out there, but 
>nobody sane would ever present them to a bank because they're worth more 
>as collectibles than as money, just like old silver and gold coins that 
>are now worth many times their face value.
>
>This is decidedly different than what happens to (relatively rare) USD2 
>bills, which banks accept without comment but only give out to customers 
>upon specific request.  Banks also hoard USD50 and USD100 bills, but 
>they'll ask if you want them if your withdrawal is large ("Do you want 
>that in hundreds or twenties?").
>
>S

Hoard $50's?

Hmmm, Canadian bank machines routinely dish out our $50's, though the
machines are usually identified and at locations where "regular" $20
dispensers are also available.

Nobody wrote:
>> This is decidedly different than what happens to (relatively rare) USD2 
>> bills, which banks accept without comment but only give out to customers 
>> upon specific request.  Banks also hoard USD50 and USD100 bills, but 
>> they'll ask if you want them if your withdrawal is large ("Do you want 
>> that in hundreds or twenties?").
> 
> Hoard $50's?

Yes, same reason as $100 bills: retailers won't take them, so most 
customers don't want them.  It makes little sense since the same 
retailers will happily take a thick stack of $20s, which can be just as 
easily counterfeited, but that's how it is.

Another knock against the $50 bill is people don't see them often, since 
they're relatively useless (people either have $100s or $20s), so 
they're not comfortable with them.  If people can't figure out if a 
somewhat more common $100 bill is fake, they'll never be able to figure 
it out for a less common $50 bill...

$2 bills have a worse problem, incidentally.  Many people have never 
seen one in their entire lives -- or even know they exist -- and they 
look different than all the other bills.  Many clerks won't take them 
without checking with a manager; if the manager hasn't seen one before 
(which is fairly rare -- they _are_ still in circulation), they may 
refuse to accept it even though the potential loss from a counterfeit is 
negligible.

> Hmmm, Canadian bank machines routinely dish out our $50's, though the
> machines are usually identified and at locations where "regular" $20
> dispensers are also available.

US ATMs generally only dispense $20 bills; it makes them simpler and 
requires less refilling if there's only one bill type.  There are still 
a few that give out $5 and $10 bills as well, though they're rare.  Ones 
in casinos will give you $100 bills, since they accept them at the 
tables and that's where they want you spending your money.  I've never 
seen a US ATM dispense $50 bills.

S

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:11:30 -0500, Stephen Sprunk
 wrote:

>Nobody wrote:
>>> This is decidedly different than what happens to (relatively rare) USD2 
>>> bills, which banks accept without comment but only give out to customers 
>>> upon specific request.  Banks also hoard USD50 and USD100 bills, but 
>>> they'll ask if you want them if your withdrawal is large ("Do you want 
>>> that in hundreds or twenties?").
>> 
>> Hoard $50's?
>
>Yes, same reason as $100 bills: retailers won't take them, so most 
>customers don't want them.  It makes little sense since the same 
>retailers will happily take a thick stack of $20s, which can be just as 
>easily counterfeited, but that's how it is.
>
>Another knock against the $50 bill is people don't see them often, since 
>they're relatively useless (people either have $100s or $20s), so 
>they're not comfortable with them.  If people can't figure out if a 
>somewhat more common $100 bill is fake, they'll never be able to figure 
>it out for a less common $50 bill...
>
>$2 bills have a worse problem, incidentally.  Many people have never 
>seen one in their entire lives -- or even know they exist -- and they 
>look different than all the other bills.  Many clerks won't take them 
>without checking with a manager; if the manager hasn't seen one before 
>(which is fairly rare -- they _are_ still in circulation), they may 
>refuse to accept it even though the potential loss from a counterfeit is 
>negligible.
>
>> Hmmm, Canadian bank machines routinely dish out our $50's, though the
>> machines are usually identified and at locations where "regular" $20
>> dispensers are also available.
>
>US ATMs generally only dispense $20 bills; it makes them simpler and 
>requires less refilling if there's only one bill type.  There are still 
>a few that give out $5 and $10 bills as well, though they're rare.  Ones 
>in casinos will give you $100 bills, since they accept them at the 
>tables and that's where they want you spending your money.  I've never 
>seen a US ATM dispense $50 bills.
>
Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?

Charles Ellson wrote:

> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size 

Yes, it's a pain in the a*se when you're looking in your wallet to find 
the right notes to pay with...

-- 
Jeremy Double  {real address, include nospam}
Rail and transport photos at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdouble/collections/72157603834894248/

Graham Murray wrote:

> Having all banknotes the same size is surely discrimination against
> blind people.

Not really. There are plenty of situations in life where one group of
people is advantaged/disadvantaged with respect to another. It's only
discriminatory if it is done either with the desire of causing a
specific outcome of that kind, or else in contravention of relevant
rules that are designed to avoid such an outcome.

That is not to say that the blind and those who lobby on their behalf
couldn't make sufficient noise to shame the US Federal Reserve into
doing something about it.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857120.html
(20 309 at Morecambe, 6 Apr 2005)

Chris Tolley wrote:
> Graham Murray wrote:
> 
> 
>>Having all banknotes the same size is surely discrimination against
>>blind people.
> 
> 
> Not really. There are plenty of situations in life where one group of
> people is advantaged/disadvantaged with respect to another. It's only
> discriminatory if it is done either with the desire of causing a
> specific outcome of that kind, or else in contravention of relevant
> rules that are designed to avoid such an outcome.
> 
> That is not to say that the blind and those who lobby on their behalf
> couldn't make sufficient noise to shame the US Federal Reserve into
> doing something about it.


Court Agrees That Paper Money Discriminates Against the Blind

By Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 21, 2008; A17

A federal appeals court yesterday upheld a lower court's ruling that the 
U.S. currency system discriminates against blind people because bills of 
different denominations are the same size, shape and color and cannot be 
easily distinguished by the visually impaired.

In a 2 to 1 decision, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the District of Columbia Circuit said the existing currency system 
violates the federal Rehabilitation Act. The judges said that the 
Treasury Department must find a way to accommodate the needs of the 
visually impaired.

for the rest of the article

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/20/AR2008052001117_pf.html

-- 
John Mara

Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>> Hmmm, Canadian bank machines routinely dish out our $50's, though the
>> machines are usually identified and at locations where "regular" $20
>> dispensers are also available.
> 
> US ATMs generally only dispense $20 bills; it makes them simpler and 
> requires less refilling if there's only one bill type.  There are still 
> a few that give out $5 and $10 bills as well, though they're rare.  Ones 
> in casinos will give you $100 bills, since they accept them at the 
> tables and that's where they want you spending your money.  I've never 
> seen a US ATM dispense $50 bills.

There are at least 3 ATMs within a 5 mile radius of my residence that 
dish out $50 bills. So they do exist.

John Mara wrote:

> Chris Tolley wrote:
>> Graham Murray wrote:
>> 
>>>Having all banknotes the same size is surely discrimination against
>>>blind people.
>> 
>> Not really. There are plenty of situations in life where one group of
>> people is advantaged/disadvantaged with respect to another. It's only
>> discriminatory if it is done either with the desire of causing a
>> specific outcome of that kind, or else in contravention of relevant
>> rules that are designed to avoid such an outcome.

> In a 2 to 1 decision, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals 
> for the District of Columbia Circuit said the existing currency system 
> violates the federal Rehabilitation Act. The judges said that the 
> Treasury Department must find a way to accommodate the needs of the 
> visually impaired.

I didn't know that the Rehabiltation act had such provisions; I thought
it was just concerned with employment and communications. I suspect that
in a typical lawyerly way some unrelated provision has been claimed to
have been written with the intention of conferring such rights.

Still, it is progress of a sort, no matter how it has been arrived at.

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14104754.html
(43 101 at Peterborough, 3 Sep 1979)

"Graham Murray"  wrote in message 
news:87d4m9d9ef.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
> Roland Perry  writes:
>
>> In message , at 06:13:27
>> on Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Charles Ellson 
>> remarked:
>>>Aren't US banknotes also all the same size
>>
>> Yes, they are.
>
> Does the USA not have disability discrimination legislation? Having all
> banknotes the same size is surely discrimination against blind people.

I thought that the US Federal Reserve had added colour to their notes in 
recent years, which should help. One would think that they would also put 
some form of braille on notes to help delineate. A least one European states 
that I can think of had been doing that well before the euro was introduced.

Don't euro notes have a form of braille? I can't remember off hand.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> "Graham Murray"  wrote in message 
> news:87d4m9d9ef.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
>> Roland Perry  writes:
>>
>>> In message , at 06:13:27
>>> on Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Charles Ellson 
>>> remarked:
>>>> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size
>>> Yes, they are.
>> Does the USA not have disability discrimination legislation? Having all
>> banknotes the same size is surely discrimination against blind people.
> 
> I thought that the US Federal Reserve had added colour to their notes in 
> recent years, which should help.

The color (added in 2004) really doesn't help much in practice, since 
most of the bills still in circulation don't have it and thus the colors 
haven't been absorbed into the public consciousness.  Heck, I still 
today frequently get "small portrait" bills (last printed in 1993-1995) 
in addition to "large portrait" non-color ones (last printed in 
2001-2003).  And that's in the US, in the same city as a Federal Reserve 
Bank; over two thirds of US currency circulates _outside_ the US, where 
banks aren't actively replacing old bills with new ones.

You can see images of all modern US currency in its various forms at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Note

So far, no color $100s have been printed, but that's planned.  The $1 
bill didn't get a "large portrait" version in the 1990s because they 
were supposed to be removed from circulation and replaced with $1 coins, 
but special interest groups (mainly vending machine makers/owners) got 
that postponed indefinitely.  The $2 bill wasn't redesigned simply due 
to apathy; there aren't enough of them to matter (less than 1% of all US 
bills), and most are kept as collectibles, not circulating currency, 
though that might change if/when plans for withdrawing the $1 bill are 
finally put into action.

 > One would think that they would also put some form of braille on notes
 > to help delineate.

That's tough with our bills since they're cloth (high grade denim, 
technically) and not that nearly indestructible plastic/paper stuff used 
for most other countries' notes.  Braille and cloth don't mix well; even 
if you could print the bills with the feature, it'd be ruined after a 
few weeks/months in circulation.

S

Charles Ellson wrote:
> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
> accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?

They're all the same size, yes.  Folks do occasionally make mistakes, 
but that's not a major concern (other than for the blind) in bill design 
compared to anti-counterfeiting features.

One of the old tricks was to take a $1 bill, bleach the ink off, and 
print a $100 bill's faces on it.  This got around the checks specific to 
the material used, since all bills until recently had identical cloth. 
Newer bills have security features that prevent that -- if cashiers 
bother looking for them.

S

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:58:52 -0500, Stephen Sprunk 
wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit:

>Charles Ellson wrote:
>> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
>> accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?
>
>They're all the same size, yes.  Folks do occasionally make mistakes, 
>but that's not a major concern (other than for the blind) in bill design 
>compared to anti-counterfeiting features.

But, of course, the Fed was told by the courts that their current
methods are a violation of the law because they don't take the blind
into account.

>One of the old tricks was to take a $1 bill, bleach the ink off, and 
>print a $100 bill's faces on it.  This got around the checks specific to 
>the material used, since all bills until recently had identical cloth. 
>Newer bills have security features that prevent that -- if cashiers 
>bother looking for them.
>
>S

"Stephen Sprunk"  wrote in message 
news:RoD7k.9663$jI5.2794@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...

> That's tough with our bills since they're cloth (high grade denim, 
> technically) and not that nearly indestructible plastic/paper stuff used 
> for most other countries' notes.  Braille and cloth don't mix well; even 
> if you could print the bills with the feature, it'd be ruined after a few 
> weeks/months in circulation.
>

Will Britain or the Eurozone ever get polymer notes, I wonder?

>On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:11:30 -0500, Stephen Sprunk
> wrote:
>
>>Nobody wrote:
>>>> This is decidedly different than what happens to (relatively rare) USD2 
>>>> bills, which banks accept without comment but only give out to customers 
>>>> upon specific request.  Banks also hoard USD50 and USD100 bills, but 
>>>> they'll ask if you want them if your withdrawal is large ("Do you want 
>>>> that in hundreds or twenties?").
>>> 
>>> Hoard $50's?
>>
>>Yes, same reason as $100 bills: retailers won't take them, so most 
>>customers don't want them.  It makes little sense since the same 
>>retailers will happily take a thick stack of $20s, which can be just as 
>>easily counterfeited, but that's how it is.
>>
>>Another knock against the $50 bill is people don't see them often, since 
>>they're relatively useless (people either have $100s or $20s), so 
>>they're not comfortable with them.  If people can't figure out if a 
>>somewhat more common $100 bill is fake, they'll never be able to figure 
>>it out for a less common $50 bill...
>>
>>$2 bills have a worse problem, incidentally.  Many people have never 
>>seen one in their entire lives -- or even know they exist -- and they 
>>look different than all the other bills.  Many clerks won't take them 
>>without checking with a manager; if the manager hasn't seen one before 
>>(which is fairly rare -- they _are_ still in circulation), they may 
>>refuse to accept it even though the potential loss from a counterfeit is 
>>negligible.
>>
>>> Hmmm, Canadian bank machines routinely dish out our $50's, though the
>>> machines are usually identified and at locations where "regular" $20
>>> dispensers are also available.
>>
>>US ATMs generally only dispense $20 bills; it makes them simpler and 
>>requires less refilling if there's only one bill type.  There are still 
>>a few that give out $5 and $10 bills as well, though they're rare.  Ones 
>>in casinos will give you $100 bills, since they accept them at the 
>>tables and that's where they want you spending your money.  I've never 
>>seen a US ATM dispense $50 bills.
>>
>Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
>accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?

Canadian bills are the same size, and although they're highly
colour-contrasted, that wouldn't immediately help a sight-challenged
person.

There is a series of raised "tactile features" in the top right
quadrant of Canadian bills recognized by the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind (the CNIB -- or "Seein' Eye Bee"!  Yeah, even
sight-challenged have a sense of humour) though these are not Braille
symbols.

As for "sandwiching", ah, would any bank worth its mettle accept a
"bundle" of notes simply on its outside face notes?

As an aside on the bundle argument, pity the poor barperson/shopkeeper
in Zimbabwe having to accept a Stack of Zim dollars to buy a beer
these days...

Free Lunch wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:58:52 -0500, Stephen Sprunk 
> wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit:
> 
>> Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
>>> accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?
>> They're all the same size, yes.  Folks do occasionally make mistakes, 
>> but that's not a major concern (other than for the blind) in bill design 
>> compared to anti-counterfeiting features.
> 
> But, of course, the Fed was told by the courts that their current
> methods are a violation of the law because they don't take the blind
> into account.

That decision is barely a month old, so it hardly had any effect on the 
last 80 years of bill design.  It's not clear what, if anything, will be 
done in response.  It'll probably still be tied up for a few more years 
on appeal to the Supreme Court, and I bet Congress will do something 
about it (i.e. exemption from ADA) by then on request from the Fed and 
the Treasury.

Still, I'm sure something will be done to correct the problem 
eventually.  It _is_ a minor annoyance to the rest of us, but the costs 
of changing our currency, particularly in a short time period, are 
tremendous.

S

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:01:24 -0500, Stephen Sprunk
 wrote:

>Free Lunch wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:58:52 -0500, Stephen Sprunk 
>> wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit:
>> 
>>> Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> Aren't US banknotes also all the same size thus making it easier to
>>>> accidentally sandwich a high value note in amongst low value notes ?
>>> They're all the same size, yes.  Folks do occasionally make mistakes, 
>>> but that's not a major concern (other than for the blind) in bill design 
>>> compared to anti-counterfeiting features.
>> 
>> But, of course, the Fed was told by the courts that their current
>> methods are a violation of the law because they don't take the blind
>> into account.
>
>That decision is barely a month old, so it hardly had any effect on the 
>last 80 years of bill design.  It's not clear what, if anything, will be 
>done in response.  It'll probably still be tied up for a few more years 
>on appeal to the Supreme Court, and I bet Congress will do something 
>about it (i.e. exemption from ADA) by then on request from the Fed and 
>the Treasury.
>
>Still, I'm sure something will be done to correct the problem 
>eventually.  It _is_ a minor annoyance to the rest of us, but the costs 
>of changing our currency, particularly in a short time period, are 
>tremendous.
>
A start could be made by use of distinctive colours and
designs/symbols on a sufficiently large section of each note (like
Bank of England notes) but without departing greatly from the basic
green note. Changing sizes (if actually deemed necessary) could be
left until later with the process spread over a number of years.

Charles Ellson wrote:
> A start could be made by use of distinctive colours and
> designs/symbols on a sufficiently large section of each note (like
> Bank of England notes) but without departing greatly from the basic
> green note. Changing sizes (if actually deemed necessary) could be
> left until later with the process spread over a number of years. 

The newest notes _do_ have distinctive coloring; for older notes a 
cursory glance (by someone with normal vision) will distinguish between 
them due to the different portraits, even the monochromatic ones.  The 
"large portrait" redesign in the 1990s solved most of the problems for 
merely "vision impaired" folks, and color took care of the rest.

The issue at hand, though, is that neither of those things help the 
blind figure out what they're holding; you need different sizes, 
braille, or something similar that can be distinguished solely by touch, 
and as of today US notes have nothing helpful in that area -- they all 
feel exactly the same.

I recall some notes I had a while back when traveling (FRF? NLG? AUD? 
NZD?) had clear sections that one could feel and, if given a few 
seconds, determine the shape and thus what denomination the note was. 
That's an interesting possibility as an alternative to different sizes 
or braille.  However, I don't know if that would be compatible with the 
US's use of cloth notes...

S

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:34:08 -0500, Stephen Sprunk
 wrote:

>Charles Ellson wrote:
>> A start could be made by use of distinctive colours and
>> designs/symbols on a sufficiently large section of each note (like
>> Bank of England notes) but without departing greatly from the basic
>> green note. Changing sizes (if actually deemed necessary) could be
>> left until later with the process spread over a number of years. 
>
>The newest notes _do_ have distinctive coloring; for older notes a 
>cursory glance (by someone with normal vision) will distinguish between 
>them due to the different portraits, even the monochromatic ones.  The 
>"large portrait" redesign in the 1990s solved most of the problems for 
>merely "vision impaired" folks, and color took care of the rest.
>
Ah! I don't get many in my change "over here" so I missed that
happening. ;-)

>The issue at hand, though, is that neither of those things help the 
>blind figure out what they're holding; you need different sizes, 
>braille, or something similar that can be distinguished solely by touch, 
>and as of today US notes have nothing helpful in that area -- they all 
>feel exactly the same.
>
>I recall some notes I had a while back when traveling (FRF? NLG? AUD? 
>NZD?) had clear sections that one could feel and, if given a few 
>seconds, determine the shape and thus what denomination the note was. 
>That's an interesting possibility as an alternative to different sizes 
>or braille.  However, I don't know if that would be compatible with the 
>US's use of cloth notes...
>
BoE notes have holograms integrated into the (made from rag IIRC)
paper so mixing materials doesn't seem to be a problem. With Braille I
suspect the difficulty lies with the inconstant thickness resulting or
the eventual flattening of the "dots". Punching holes in the notes is
probably not an option so relying on textural differences seems to be
the remaining option if the size and/or colour can't be changed.
Possibly a variation on the BoE holograms could provide textural
"dots" but how many different denominations of dollar note would need
to be identified ?

Matthew Geier wrote:
>  So the only countries that currently have plastic notes all get the 
> Australian mint to print them for them, so take up of these types of 
> notes has been limited to smaller Pacific rim counties that don't have 
> their own currency printing facilities or don't mind 'out sourcing' it to 
> Australia.

Doesn't the Isle of Man have plastic notes?  Are theirs Australian as well?

Phil

"Charles Ellson"  wrote
> >
> BoE notes have holograms integrated into the (made from rag IIRC)
> paper so mixing materials doesn't seem to be a problem. With Braille I
> suspect the difficulty lies with the inconstant thickness resulting or
> the eventual flattening of the "dots". Punching holes in the notes is
> probably not an option so relying on textural differences seems to be
> the remaining option if the size and/or colour can't be changed.
> Possibly a variation on the BoE holograms could provide textural
> "dots" but how many different denominations of dollar note would need
> to be identified ?

I'm not sure what features blind people use to distinguish BoE notes, but
apart from different size for different denominations, and the hologram,
they use raised printing. In the past the size of BoE notes have changed
(the white fivers were ginormous, and in the 1960s we got new small pound
notes - didn't we accuse Harold Wilson of shrinking the pound?), though I
suspect that changing the size of notes now would cause difficulties for
cash machines, vending machines that accept notes, etc.

Peter

Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:34:08 -0500, Stephen Sprunk
>  wrote:
>> The issue at hand, though, is that neither of those things help the 
>> blind figure out what they're holding; you need different sizes, 
>> braille, or something similar that can be distinguished solely by touch, 
>> and as of today US notes have nothing helpful in that area -- they all 
>> feel exactly the same.
>>
>> I recall some notes I had a while back when traveling (FRF? NLG? AUD? 
>> NZD?) had clear sections that one could feel and, if given a few 
>> seconds, determine the shape and thus what denomination the note was. 
>> That's an interesting possibility as an alternative to different sizes 
>> or braille.  However, I don't know if that would be compatible with the 
>> US's use of cloth notes...
>>
> BoE notes have holograms integrated into the (made from rag IIRC)
> paper so mixing materials doesn't seem to be a problem.

Interesting.  I assume the holograms are attached on top of the rag, 
though, instead of integrated into a hole in the material?

 > With Braille I suspect the difficulty lies with the inconstant thickness
 > resulting or the eventual flattening of the "dots".

That's one problem; another is that the notes get rather abused in 
circulation, being crumpled up, put through washing machines, etc. and 
braille relies on having a flat medium, not a wrinkly/soft one.

 > Punching holes in the notes is probably not an option

Actually, that was my first thought, but obviously the largest notes 
would have to have the fewest and/or smallest holes, and you'd have to 
study how to do it in a way that wouldn't increase tearing (a problem 
for our cloth notes already).

 > so relying on textural differences seems to be the remaining option
 > if the size and/or colour can't be changed.

Color can easily be changed for notes above USD1, but that doesn't help 
the blind.  There are millions of vending machines that take USD1 bills, 
though, so any changes to those are impractical.  The transition to 
coins was supposed to solve that, but hasn't happened yet.

> Possibly a variation on the BoE holograms could provide textural
> "dots" but how many different denominations of dollar note would need
> to be identified ?

We currently have USD 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100 notes in circulation. 
  There also used to be USD 1000 notes in circulation, but they were 
withdrawn a few decades ago; I expect USD 200 and 500 notes to 
eventually be circulated, as well as a return of the USD 1000 note, in 
time due to inflation, but not for several decades.

S

"Matthew Geier"  wrote in message 
news:4861688a$0$17506$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> When the Australian Mint patent expires probably. I've heard a story
> that the Eurozone investigated using Australian style plastic notes, but
> the Australian Mint holds the process very close and wouldn't release the
> process for use in Europe. If the Eurozone wanted plastic notes, they
> would have to be printed in Australia.
>
> So the only countries that currently have plastic notes all get the
> Australian mint to print them for them, so take up of these types of
> notes has been limited to smaller Pacific rim counties that don't have
> their own currency printing facilities or don't mind 'out sourcing' it to
> Australia.
>
What about Romania, however? They have a 1,000-lei note.

"Phil Wieland"  wrote in message 
news:lb99j5-d83.ln1@friedbread.liverpub.com...

>>  So the only countries that currently have plastic notes all get the 
>> Australian mint to print them for them, so take up of these types of 
>> notes has been limited to smaller Pacific rim counties that don't have 
>> their own currency printing facilities or don't mind 'out sourcing' it to 
>> Australia.
>
> Doesn't the Isle of Man have plastic notes?  Are theirs Australian as 
> well?
>
Not to my knowledge and not in my experience as I was there not too long 
ago.

> $2 bills have a worse problem, incidentally.  Many people have never
> seen one in their entire lives -- or even know they exist -- and they
> look different than all the other bills.  Many clerks won't take them
> without checking with a manager; if the manager hasn't seen one before
> (which is fairly rare -- they _are_ still in circulation), they may
> refuse to accept it even though the potential loss from a counterfeit is
> negligible.

I had trouble enough trying to get rid of some $1 coins that an airport
vending machine gave me some years back. Not really knowing the US monetary
system and being used to a £1 coin, I was most bemused to find that nearly
every shop I tried to spend it in ending up examing it, raising eyebrows and
in one case, calling over a supervisor. If they still use the $1 note, why
have a coin as well? Were they an experiment? Are they still minted?

-- 
---
This message has come to an end.
Please exit to your left.
---

"Lew 1"  wrote in message 
news:g4e2rq$d20$1@aioe.org...

> I had trouble enough trying to get rid of some $1 coins that an airport
> vending machine gave me some years back. Not really knowing the US 
> monetary
> system and being used to a £1 coin, I was most bemused to find that nearly
> every shop I tried to spend it in ending up examing it, raising eyebrows 
> and
> in one case, calling over a supervisor.

Ignorance?

> If they still use the $1 note, why
> have a coin as well? Were they an experiment? Are they still minted?
>

They are certainly still being minted. They started a dollar-coin minting 
campaign about a year ago with all the deceased US presidents, as a matter 
of fact.

There have been US 1-dollar coins in circulation synonymously with the 
1-dollar note on and off for the past 30 years at least. There were the 
Eisenhower dollars of the 1970s, which are roughly the size of a 5-pound 
coin. Then, in the late 1970s/early 1980s, they started minting the Susan B. 
Anthony dollars. I understood that this was to be a real effort to eliminate 
the dollar banknote, though the coins' size was too close to a 25-cent 
piece, which created confusion. AIUI, the SBAs were never really popular, 
though they were useful in vending machines.

Then came the Sacagawea dollars of the late 1990s, which are larger than 
SBAs. I don't know how popular those coins are or not, but as long as the 
dollar note continues to exist in circulation, I don't think that they are 
going to gain that much popularity. I am also guessing that coins from the 
presidential dollar campaign will mostly be hoarded, rather than used in 
circulation, as long as the dollar-note exists.

I have heard that one reason they don't do away with the dollar note with 
its image of George Washington is psychological as the 1-dollar note is 
probably one of the foremost symbols of the United States. Take that away 
and what do you have, so the thinking might go. This could have adverse 
effects.

I have also found myself wondering why the Federal Reserve does not issue a 
multi-sided coin, if they were really serious about eradicating the dollar 
note. This would avoid confusion with other coins and not require it to be 
so big, as was the case with the Eisenhower or Liiberty dollars.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I have heard that one reason they don't do away with the dollar note with 
> its image of George Washington is psychological as the 1-dollar note is 
> probably one of the foremost symbols of the United States. Take that away 
> and what do you have, so the thinking might go. This could have adverse 
> effects.

Interesting - eight years ago I recall seeing posters on the New York Subway 
showing Washington himself explaining his face isn't on the dollar coin as 
though this was an asset...

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> "Lew 1"  wrote in message 
> news:g4e2rq$d20$1@aioe.org...
>> If they still use the $1 note, why
>> have a coin as well? Were they an experiment? Are they still minted?
> 
> They are certainly still being minted. They started a dollar-coin minting 
> campaign about a year ago with all the deceased US presidents, as a matter 
> of fact.
> 
> There have been US 1-dollar coins in circulation synonymously with the 
> 1-dollar note on and off for the past 30 years at least. There were the 
> Eisenhower dollars of the 1970s, which are roughly the size of a 5-pound 
> coin. Then, in the late 1970s/early 1980s, they started minting the Susan B. 
> Anthony dollars. I understood that this was to be a real effort to eliminate 
> the dollar banknote, though the coins' size was too close to a 25-cent 
> piece, which created confusion. AIUI, the SBAs were never really popular, 
> though they were useful in vending machines.

The public _hated_ the SBA dollar coin, both for that reason and because 
it had a relatively obscure woman on the face instead of a dead 
president, which has been our custom for many, many decades now, just as 
many other countries put their current leaders on their coins and/or notes.

> Then came the Sacagawea dollars of the late 1990s, which are larger than 
> SBAs.

They are exactly the same size and weight, and have the same electrical 
properties, as SBA dollars so that they work interchangeably in vending 
machines.  However, the new coins are gold-colored (at least when minted 
-- they tarnish rapidly), which helps distinguish them from quarters by 
sight, and have a smooth edge instead of a milled one, which helps 
distinguish them by touch.  They're also slightly thicker and larger 
than quarters, but not enough for most people to distinguish by sight or 
touch.

 > I don't know how popular those coins are or not,

People hate Sac dollars almost as much as they hate SBA dollars. 
They're heavy and still easy to mistake for quarters if you're in a 
hurry.  And they still didn't have a dead president on them, but rather 
a native American woman most people have never heard of, which many 
people mistake to be an illegal immigrant sneaking over the border 
carrying a baby.  From bad to worse.

 > but as long as the dollar note continues to exist in circulation, I
 > don't think that they are going to gain that much popularity.

People don't like them because they're heavy and bulky in comparison to 
bills representing the same amount of money.  Of course, there are 
problems with bills, particularly in vending machines, but that doesn't 
outweigh the downside.  Maybe if we had a $5 coin too...

The Sac dollar was specifically introduced so that we could stop 
printing $1 notes, and there was a law passed to that effect, but the 
vending machine lobby (and public opinion, to a lesser extent) got that 
delayed indefinitely.

 > I am also guessing that coins from the presidential dollar campaign will
 > mostly be hoarded, rather than used in circulation, as long as the
 > dollar-note exists.

That's intentional on the part of the Mint.  They've made _tons_ of 
money (no pun intended) on people hoarding state quarters, and they hope 
for similar success with the presidential dollars.  They also claim as a 
goal education about some of the lesser-known presidents, and it also 
puts off the darn problem of picking which dead president (NOT another 
obscure woman!) to put on the dollar coin for a couple decades -- 
they'll just use all of them in rotation.

> I have heard that one reason they don't do away with the dollar note with 
> its image of George Washington is psychological as the 1-dollar note is 
> probably one of the foremost symbols of the United States. Take that away 
> and what do you have, so the thinking might go. This could have adverse 
> effects.

Indeed.  Too bad Washington's face is already on the quarter, or we 
could have solved that problem easily by putting him on the dollar coin.

> I have also found myself wondering why the Federal Reserve does not issue a 
> multi-sided coin, if they were really serious about eradicating the dollar 
> note. This would avoid confusion with other coins and not require it to be 
> so big, as was the case with the Eisenhower or Liiberty dollars. 

The Federal Reserve does not issue coins; that's up to the US Mint, and 
the Fed buys coins from them at face value.  In contrast, the Fed buys 
notes from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing for $1 per 1000. 
There's an obvious bias there...

AFAIK, the US has never had multi-sided coins, nor bimetallic ones. 
Both would be interesting approaches to the problem, but _any_ change 
from the status quo will be resisted by the vending machine lobby and 
the retail lobby, and fight a long battle with public opinion.  It's 
easier to just maintain the status quo, even if it's not ideal.

S