Yeah. I really question the government’s introduction the Sackie without discontinuing the bills. It almost seems as if they want it to fail.
Given that the average life-span of a U.S. $1 bill is well under 2 years, they could have an almost complete changeover in just a few years. And they wouldn’t even have to destroy any dollar bills. They could just replace the “retired” bills with Sackies as they come in. Of course, the $1 bill would still be around, but I expect that in time, it would go the way of the $2 bill.
But I have to say that the re-design of the $100s, $50s, and $20s make me think that the folks at the treasury department are a few pennies short of a Sackie. They seem to have disregarded aesthetic considerations altogether. The two innovations that I welcome are the anti-counterfeiting measures and the inclusion of the bold block number to help the visually impaired. There isn’t much to do about the block number as far as aesthetics, but they sure could have done a better job of working the anti-counterfeiting measures in in a more subtle way. Also, the fact that they stripped Ben Franklin of his fur collar annoys me to no end. The new bill is plain ugly, and it really didn’t need to be that way.
I hear that there is plastic money in Australia and New Zealand. Anybody know what it is like?

