Treasury Goes High-Tech With Redesigned $100 Bills 515
Hugh Pickens writes "AP reports that as part of an effort to stay ahead of counterfeiters, the Department of the Treasury has designed a high-tech makeover of the $100 bill with a disappearing Liberty Bell in an inkwell and a bright blue security ribbon composed of thousands of tiny lenses that magnify objects in mysterious ways. The new blue security ribbon will give a 3-D effect to the micro-images that the thousands of lenses will be magnifying. Tilt the note back and forth and you will see tiny bells on the ribbon change to 100s as they move. Tilt the note side to side and the images will move up and down."
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
The Real Counterfitters are The Fed (Score:4, Insightful)
The Free Competition in Currency Act [downsizedc.org] and Federal Reserve Transparency Act [downsizedc.org] are good places to start. Talk to your congressman today and ask them to sober up.
Peter
Counterfeiting (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how the process of counterfeiting -- injecting paper money into the economy with nothing of actual value to back it up -- is exactly the same as what government does to cause inflation. The result? The criminal (er, government) holds more money, at the expense of everybody else whose dollars are now worth less.
Of course, when you're at the top of the pyramid, your actions are sacred rather than criminal.
A disappearing Liberty Bell... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't get it... (Score:4, Insightful)
The security feature is that they cost more to make than their face value.
All US bills still same size, color (Score:5, Insightful)
There's really no excuse for this. The bills should have different color and size to help the visually impaired. There's no good reason not to. Sure, don't change the $1 due to bill readers. I suppose there are $5/$10/$20 readers, though usually at the post office (and hence easy to change from the government's perspective). But really -- why not mix up the $50 and $100 so that they're easier for those with disabilities to use. It'd at least be a step in the right direction.
Re:Pointless. (Score:3, Insightful)
You do realise that you are welcome to trade only with currency that you consider valid, and to only trade with those who have the same opinion as you, yes?
Re:Still out of date (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
My(admittedly layman's) understanding, is that hundreds, to the degree they are counterfeited at all, are mostly the domain of Real Serious Actors(North Korea always seems to be on the list of suspects). Most domestic and/or fairly small-time operators are banging out twenties or smaller; because those are much easier to disseminate without attracting suspicion(counterfeit currency is worse than useless if you can't find a good way to spend it, or sell it to someobody who can, since merely producing or knowingly possessing is illegal; but it is only valuable if spent). Even if they are 100% authentic, most places will give you a seriously suspicious look if you show up with a brick of hundreds. No bored retail drone is even going to bother with a second glance if you pay your tab in a busy, dimly-lit bar with a reasonably plausible twenty or two.
Re:I can already see them working at it (Score:5, Insightful)
So you do not have to have your own credit card swiping machine and an account with a processor to sell something on craigslist.
Re:Still out of date (Score:4, Insightful)
The US Treasury Department is testing polymer bank notes, but there are concerns that the American public will reject a plastic Greenback.
Are they serious? Americans wouldn't like more durable plastic money because it's not American paper money? I've never lived in a world with paper money, and whenever I go overseas I always notice that paper money is flimsy and often torn, not to mention in the tropics it's sweaty. Plastic money is the way to go.
Re:All US bills still same size, color (Score:3, Insightful)
I sympathize with your argument, I really do. Different sized bills would also make counterfeiting more difficult.
However you forget that every bank branch in the country has at least one money counter; how many are there? As an example, Bank of America lists upwards of 6000 branches.
There are something like 400,000 ATMs in the United States as well, how many of those would need modified?
What's The Point? (Score:5, Insightful)
All older bills are valid until they wear out. In other words; this is a pointless exercise unless they set an expiry date for older bills.
Re:Still out of date (Score:5, Insightful)
The US "rejects" changes to its currency because it never pushes changes properly. The dollar coin being one example. How do you get people to switch from dollar bills to dollar coins? By not printing dollar bills any more and taking them out of circulation when they go through clearing. Eventually everyone switches whether they want to or not. As a further incentive you pass legislation that makes old currency non-legal tender after some reasonable point, after which people must exchange it at a central bank.
If the situation with dollars sounds pathetic, that's because it is. European countries are far more adept at switching notes than the US, so adept in fact that most of Europe switched entirely from one entire currency to another in the space of a few months. Not only does it mean currency can more readily introduce anti counterfeiting measures but can also include more features for blind & sight impaired people too such as coloured notes & size differences in coinage.
Re:time for a change (Score:4, Insightful)
Report to Econ 101 please.
The damage from counterfeiting is inflation. Therefore, counterfeiting is a crime whose damage is divided among all individuals who are holding cash, or who are holding dollar-denominated assets at a fixed interest rate.
That the damage to each victim is very small is a secondary issue that perhaps could be considered at sentencing time.
Re:Pointless. (Score:2, Insightful)
"This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." -- US money.
Note the word "debts", which has a very specific meaning. To quote wikipedia, "Debt is that which is owed" -- past tense. Current or future transactions are not debt.
Re:All US bills still same size, color (Score:5, Insightful)
I could see this argument 20 years ago. But does it really matter anymore since CCs have become so ubiquitous? I hardly EVER use paper money anymore.
Funny, I just switched to a budget where I do the exact opposite. Fixed cash pools are, hands down, the best way to control discretionary spending. Many would be very wise to put away the plastic and go back to an all-cash budget.
Meanwhile, if I were visually impaired, assuming US currency wasn't so retarded, I'd feel a lot more comfortable paying with physical bills rather than trusting a cashier not to defraud me by, say, double-swiping my card.
Re:Wot? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Still out of date (Score:3, Insightful)
So you propose that the United States should move more quickly on major changes to health, financial, and economic systems? That when making $1T changes 14 months of debate is too long?
Me, I'm happy that big changes take some debate. I'm not always happy with the outcome, but I welcome the debate.
Re:Still out of date (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah I don't buy the 'but think of the machines!' argument against changing the design of the US currency. Dozens upon dozens of other developed countries have changed currencies in the last 20 years. Australia switched from paper 100/50/20/10/5/2/1 dollar bills to polymer 100/50/20/10/5 dollar bills and $1 and $2 coins during the 90s. I don't remember any problems occurring with vending machines etc. A bunch of countries now license the Australian technology to print their own polymer money ... and they too had no major problems. If you do it over a couple of years and just let banks take the 'old' bills out of circulation when they get them, the transition is easy.
Not to mention half of Europe which not only changed currency designs, but the actual currency (to the Euro) virtually overnight.
Every time I visit the US I remember anew how much the USD bills suck. All the same size. All the same colour. Which means if you have a wad of them in your wallet you have to flick through them looking at the numbers to find the denomination you need. Not to mention the general flimsiness of how they feel (and it also seems they are extremely dirty!). Your coins are fine ... but the bills drive foreigners who aren't used to them insane.
Actually the whole situation is analogous to the common arguments against America switching to metric that you hear - "but we'll have to re-engineer machines, we'll have to re-make road signs, we'll have to change our computer systems". That's all true ... but other countries didn't seem to have any major disruptions when they did this (including other developed, industralised countries). So I'm pretty sure the US could manage it, with its huge economic resources and can-do attitude towards things (in general!).
Re:All US bills still same size, color (Score:1, Insightful)
I find card-only budgeting works better for me, but that's because most of my wasted money is loose change spent on junk food. I use a debit card, though, not credit - I'm still only spending money I have.
I just lost a stone and am spending less, so it's helping.
Re:time for a change (Score:4, Insightful)
The damage from counterfeiting is inflation. Therefore, counterfeiting is a crime whose damage is divided among all individuals who are holding cash, or who are holding dollar-denominated assets at a fixed interest rate.
That the damage to each victim is very small is a secondary issue that perhaps could be considered at sentencing time.
Which is why HR1206 and S604 are essential beginnings to end the reign of the largest counterfeiter and thief of American wealth, The Federal Reserve.
Re:time for a change (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody gets hurt, there's no violence involved.
Counterfeiting reduces the trust people have in the money.
Counterfeiting? I thought it was government.
Re:The Real Counterfitters are The Fed (Score:5, Insightful)
Gold's price has gone from over $600 in the 80's, to less than $300 in the 90's back up to over $600 now. How again would this remove inflation & deflation? (The US dollar inflated between those two periods, so if gold is a counterweigh, then gold prices should have increased to match.)
What happens if a huge amount of gold reserves are found? Everyone's money deflates.
You do also know that we have fewer recessions than we did while in the gold standard, right?
And that there is nothing preventing you from accepting gold as payment? See e-gold.com & their payments system.
If you are going to claim that a government agency is defrauding you, then there needs to be evidence: the inflation rate in the US has been less than 5% for almost all of the last decade, and much of that time it has been less than 2%. And you do know that inflationary bubbles aren't the only cause of asset bubbles or the only cause of recession?
A random metal is no more/less intrinsically valuable than random pieces of specially printed paper or of little black pixels in the shape of numbers on my bank's website.
Re:Still out of date (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"thousands of lenses" (Score:3, Insightful)
They are "worth" the political might of the United States. By accepting the bills, you are betting on the future political power of the USA. Similarly, if you accept gold coins, you are betting on the future trade value of gold.
Any currency -- any at all -- is nothing more than a communal expectation of continued value. It's fine for people to think that (say) gold will retain its value better than (say) the USA, but it's hogwash to claim that one value is "real" and the other is not.
Re:This is aimed at non-US countries (Score:1, Insightful)
I think you are partly wrong about this - the US government LOVES people hoarding $100 notes overseas. The $100 represents a loan given to the US government from another party, a loan that will almost certainly never have to be repaid. The US wins. Plus, it counts as good advertising - the dollar is more likely to keep its "reserve currency" status when it is the secondary or even primary currency in many countries around the world. So long as people believe the dollar is valuable, it remains valuable.
Re:The Real Counterfitters are The Fed (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course. But a random bit of metal is much harder to create out of thin air, and thus it is much better insulated against the problem of currency inflation.
Currency inflation is the problem. It is what makes the USD and indeed the US economy a bit of a prisoners dilemma. If you attempt to store your wealth in US dollars, you will find that over time, the value of that wealth approaches zero. This is due entirely to the inflation of the monetary base. This inflation is something which you do not control, and which legally you cannot opt-out of.
So the US economy requires that everyone who wants to merely keep their head "above water" finds places to put their USD denominated wealth such that it pays interest at at least the natural rate of inflation. But of course, putting your money into a fractional reserve bank may pay interest, but it also inflates the money supply. So you don't really win there.
Refusing to "play the game" means you lose, and "playing the game" from a weakened position [i.e. without the collusion of th government in maintaining a monopoly, or avoiding fraud prosecution, etc] means that you will also usually lose.
So due to the tremendous ease with which new dollars are created, and the legal tender laws which make it illegal for you to REFUSE to participate in this game, you and most people will continue to lose, as they are continually worked literally _to death_ to just keep their head above water, wealth-wise.
Of course, rows in some database are even easier to inflate than paper bills. And infact, much of the actual growth of the supply of dollars is just that: "electronic" dollars.
Having a specie based money and a strong discouragement towards paper instruments lets you avoid the insiduous destruction of inflation. And private actors _could_ do that now, but they'd be outside of the protections of government and society. Indeed, if they did it "too much", they'd become the prey of government agencies who don't fancy having their power and authority challenged.
There's nothing special about Gold. It's just that, for a number of very practical reasons, precious metals are a very good choice for a curency. Assaying precious metals is more uniform, than say, assaying cows. And cutting and recombining different fractions of whole cows is much messier, and considerably damages the value of your cow. Inert metals can be melted and cut and recombined and reminted essentially indefinitely.
When it becomes possible to cheaply inflate the supply of Gold, gold will become a very poor store of wealth and medium of exchange. But until then, when individuals are allowed to freely choose what they'd like to use as a store of wealth and a medium of exchange, Gold and Silver invariably are what they choose. THe reasons have little to do with any widely-held value assessment of gold, and instead have much to do with the practical utility of precious metals, for the reasons I discuss above.