Reagan on the 10 dollar bill

Marksist · Post by **Marksist** » 2004-06-08 04:31pm

I was watching CNN today, and they interviewed the leader of the "Reagan legacy group," which is lobbying to replace either Alexander Hamilton on the $10, or Jackson on the $20.

What do you guys think?

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-06-08 04:33pm

Reagan was a decent president, but not worthy of that high an honor.

Even CNN's own e-poll on their website had 2/3rds of the responders saying "no, don't do it".

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-06-08 04:35pm

NO. He has his name on enough things as it is.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-06-08 04:36pm

Hey, fuck no. Jackson stays on the $20. Our money is fucked up enough without forcing enormous partisan strife about it.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-08 04:37pm

Bring back the two dollar bill or something if you really want him on money. But as it is I don't really think redesigning existing bills to include him is the right way to go.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-06-08 04:39pm

i have enough trouble remembering whose on what dollar bill as it is. Throwing Reagan on one of the existing ones would be too confusing. Maybe printing a limited run of memorial $1.00 coins would be okay, but not redesigning a currently existing one.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-06-08 04:41pm

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-06-08 04:41pm

Even if I thought he deserved such a very high honor, the US goverment has wasted enough money for now redesigning money

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-06-08 04:54pm

Darth_Zod wrote:i have enough trouble remembering whose on what dollar bill as it is. Throwing Reagan on one of the existing ones would be too confusing. Maybe printing a limited run of memorial $1.00 coins would be okay, but not redesigning a currently existing one.

The USA has 1.00 coins now? I thought Canada was the only country experiancing that particular hell.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-06-08 04:56pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:i have enough trouble remembering whose on what dollar bill as it is. Throwing Reagan on one of the existing ones would be too confusing. Maybe printing a limited run of memorial $1.00 coins would be okay, but not redesigning a currently existing one.
The USA has 1.00 coins now? I thought Canada was the only country experiancing that particular hell.

we've had $1.00 coins for some time now. they just aren't as widely used as bills.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-06-08 04:56pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:i have enough trouble remembering whose on what dollar bill as it is. Throwing Reagan on one of the existing ones would be too confusing. Maybe printing a limited run of memorial $1.00 coins would be okay, but not redesigning a currently existing one.
The USA has 1.00 coins now? I thought Canada was the only country experiancing that particular hell.

Nope, we had the Susan B. Anthony dollar coins back in the early '80s, and then the Sacajewea (sp) coins came out in 2000. The Susie-B's bombed because they looked too much like quarters. The Saccy's are gold-tone, and were snatched up by collectors and never recirculated.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-06-08 04:59pm

Isn't a carrier enough?

Bob the Gunslinger · Post by **Bob the Gunslinger** » 2004-06-08 05:15pm

LadyTevar wrote:
Cpl Kendall wrote:
The USA has 1.00 coins now? I thought Canada was the only country experiancing that particular hell.
Nope, we had the Susan B. Anthony dollar coins back in the early '80s, and then the Sacajewea (sp) coins came out in 2000. The Susie-B's bombed because they looked too much like quarters. The Saccy's are gold-tone, and were snatched up by collectors and never recirculated.

The saccy's circulate a lot in CA. They are used for MUNI tokens in the Bay Area and have become a part of the currency from that. Just the other day, in OC, I received a saccy as part of my change for a purchase at the local library.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2004-06-08 05:19pm

Dammit, Reagan's hagiographers have done enough already. He's everywhere now anyway, he doesn't need to be on my money.

Marksist · Post by **Marksist** » 2004-06-08 05:30pm

Also in the same interview on CNN with that leader of the "Reagan Legacy Group," the guy seemed very confident that it would pass. He claimed that he has spoken with many Congressmen and Senators, and that he had strong support for this. He was asked if/when this was going to pass, he said it would definetely pass, and probably within a month.
A month? That seems pretty lofty to me. But, do you all think that it could go through? Everyone so far seems to be against it on this board, but do you think that in the wake of his death, that maybe this group could use sympathy for him to get this to quickly pass?

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-06-08 05:40pm

In my view, Reagan deserves to be on a bill more than Jackson does, but I can't advocate a change.

Marksist · Post by **Marksist** » 2004-06-08 05:44pm

In my view, Reagan deserves to be on a bill more than Jackson does, but I can't advocate a change.

I agree, Frank, I can also think of many people more deserving than Jackson to be on a bill, but I don't think I would advocate changing the bill.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-06-08 06:40pm

How about the $50? Better him than Grant.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-06-08 06:49pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:How about the $50? Better him than Grant.

Why not simply split the honor between him and grant? Produce
half $50 reagans and half $50 grants?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-06-08 07:07pm

Nah...he has a ship and airport named after him.

Seriously the man has more stuff named after him then I believe he should and seriously didn't warrant a pointless change.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-06-08 07:32pm

Whatever you feel personally about Jackson, his influence and legacy are big enough to warrant his picture on the 20. Likewise, Hamilton, though he was never a president, was enormously influential, as a patriot, a Framer, and Washington's TreasSec (which is why the US Treasury is on the back of his bill). Grant is the only one who really doesn't deserve to be on money--he was a good general and he tried to be an honest politician, but he was ineffectual as a President because he surrounded himself with swine, and if good generalship alone warranted being put on money, then where the hell are my Patton $20s and my Scott $5's? Nevertheless, I'm like most Americans when it comes to the design of my money, I think: I distrust change. They're already tarting them up with ugly colors, no need to go changing portraits on us.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-06-08 08:14pm

MKSheppard wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:How about the $50? Better him than Grant.
Why not simply split the honor between him and grant? Produce
half $50 reagans and half $50 grants?

That's expensive. You'd have to make new molds and everything. Perhaps less than totally switching, but still.

And you don't get as much economies of scale over the long run due to the decrease in production for both.

Either keep it the same or switch it over completely. It would be too much money and effort to do it half half.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-06-08 08:43pm

On the one hand, I think Reagan was a much better president than Jackson could've ever hoped to be. He was also probably a better PRESIDENT than Jefferson was (though, obviously Jefferson made MASSIVE fucking contributions outside of his presidency). However, replacing them would be an affront to tradition. I would support Reagan's likeness on a new currency (ie. yet ANOTHER fucking dollar coin, or better yet a $5 one), but I don't think that he should replace another president on an existing bill.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2004-06-08 10:23pm

Put him on the Penny. Or how abouts bringing back the two, the two would be useful now with prices the way they are, and putting him on that.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-06-08 11:15pm

I say nay. The most recent president featured on legal tender was JFK, and that was because he was charismatic and was shot. (I'm being frank here.)

Reagan was charismatic as well, but let's keep our senses: He did not do anything on the magnitude of the other people on our currency... Sacajewa possibly notwithstanding.