Does the US not update coins and currency regularly?

In the IMHO thread about the effect of the death of the Queen, one issue that’s been raised is updating the coinage and currency with Charles’ image.

Some posters are saying that will be a big deal, but posters from Commonwealth countries don’t seem impressed, because we’re used to regular changes to our coinage and currency.

For instance, I remember four different images of HM onCanadian coins, an five different images on our banknotes, because every 10 to 15 years the Royal Mint and the Bank of Canada issue new coins and currency.

So, saying that the coinage and currency will have to be update with Charles doesn’t strike me as a big deal. Nor is the cost unusual, because it’s part of the regular cost of our system, not a one-time extra cost.

Is that not done in the US? Is that why some posters think it is a major cost?

US currency remains legal tender forever, and the government only takes it out of circulation when it’s worn out. Occasionally there’s a new design introduced, but it still takes a few years for the old design to fade away. If the UK does it the same way, then it wouldn’t be any great hardship, but it seems like trying to accelerate the process might be difficult.

Well, the front face of the penny hasn’t been changed in over 100 years, and the current faces of dimes and quarters date to the '40s. (The back sides have been changed quite a few times.)

Our paper money seems to get redesigned every few years in order to thwart the latest advances in counterfeiting, but the $1 bill hasn’t changed at least for as long as I’ve been alive, and even with the updates to the bills, it’s still the same face on the front and the same scene on the back, it’s just that they’re using a different drawing of Lincoln or Hamilton or Jefferson.

It’s not like they take the old coins with the old queen’s picture out of circulation. They’re still legal tender too. It’s just a die update for the new coins (which happens regularly anyway).

Paper currency is generally not withdrawn from circulation until it becomes too worn, when it is destroyed. You can still find old notes, especially larger denominations, that don’t circulate as much and hence get less worn.

As far as I know, coins continue to circulate indefinitely.

Who knows why some posters think what they think?:wink:

Actually the Washington quarter came out in 1932 and, except for the national park series and the state series, hasn’t been changed since. The Roosevelt dime was introduced in 1946 and has never been changed. The Jefferson nickel was introduced in 1938 and the obverse was finally changed in 2004. The reverse was changed briefly in 2004 and 2005 to celebrate the Lewis and Clark expedition. The Lincoln cent was introduced in 1909 with a ‘wheat back’ which was changed in 1959 to the Lincoln Memorial design. In 2009 it was changed briefly to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of Lincoln. Then the reverse was changed to the shield design in 2010 with the original 1909 design on the obverse.

You forgot the bicentennial quarters. :smiley:

I’m trying to.

:smiley:

Here, the size and thickness of the various ‘silver’ coins has been reduced in recent years and the old ones removed from circulation (and they have not contained silver since 1947). The ‘bronze’ sizes remain unchanged, although newer issues of both types are steel with a bronze or cupro-nickel wash.

IMHO, the difference is largely just one of expectation. The British expect their currency to be redesigned from time to time, with the passing of monarchs, if nothing else.

In the US, people bitch and moan any time the currency is redesigned. The bureaucrats involved in this sort of thing in the US generally make a big deal about the redesign and the reasons why in order to get the populous on board.

Also, US Coins & Bills do not carry the face of living people.
Although, if Donny wins, the “Trump Buck” ain’t out of the question.

The thread title is of course ambiguous. We (in the US) “update” our coins and currency as often as any other country, in the sense of minting new coins and printing new bills. But we very seldom make any significant redesign of our currency.

So yeah, to an American a redesign would be a big aesthetic deal, so I suppose some might think it’s a big cost as well. (It isn’t.) But as Colibri says, who knows why people think what they think?

Actually, the obverse of the quarter changed a little when the state quarters started. Old quarters had Washington’s head slightly bigger, with “LIBERTY” above his head, the year below, and “IN GOD WE TRUST” to the left. Newer ones have Washington slightly smaller, with “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” above, “QUARTER DOLLAR” below, “LIBERTY” to the left, and “IN GOD WE TRUST” to the right. I think there might have been some minor details in Washington’s head that changed, too (the ponytail looks a little simpler, for example), but that might just be differences in wear.

We also change the design of our money in Switzerland regularly - the main reason is to keep up with the newest counter-forgery measures. The old currency remains valid until most of it has anyhow been replaced naturally - banks take the old currency out of circulation. After a few years, the remaining bills are no longer accepted in the stores but have to be exchanged at a bank. Eventually, they will become invalid, and have value only as collectors items. The design for the next change has just been released (current - new)

In particular, it has been a very long time—like, since before I was born—since the U.S. changed who appears on any of its circulated currency (unless you count the various unsuccessful attempts at introducing dollar coins).

It seems to me the obvious reason for the difference is that Canadian (or British) coins bear the likeness of a person whose appearance changes, and sometimes the person itself has to change. American coins bear the likeness of a person who is dead, so they don’t need to change.

American bills have changed a few times recently to try to stay ahead of counterfeiters, even though they also bear the likenesses of dead people. So really, the coins don’t change much largely because there is no particular reason to change them.

That doesn’t happen in the states–United States notes issued back in the 1860s are still legal tender, and we’ve never invalidated any currency issued by the U.S. Treasury or the Federal Reserve System. (Early stuff, particularly in good condition, is probably worth more as collector items, but they are still worth face value at any bank.) See Federal Reserve faq

I suspect it would be very difficult to change the people depicted on U.S. money. Want to put Regan on a new fifty cent piece? The Democrats would complain. Lyndon Johnson? The Republicans wouldn’t like it. Then of course we have Washington and Lincoln each appearing on both a bill and a coin. Taking either of them off would be only slightly harder than removing “In God We Trust” I suspect.

Bank of England notes have the Queen on, but also people like Newton, Dickens, Faraday, Darwin* etc. Why does it have to be politicians?

  • I understand why an evilutionist might be a problem in the US, but still :wink:

Same in Canada and I think in Britain - coin of the realm and banknotes issued by the central banks are always good.