One of the great things about plastic money is it can have raised sections allowing the visually impaired to be able to feel what amount they are holding. They are also different colors which makes it a hell of a lot easier to work out what note your holding without having to look at the numbers.
I saw a documentary about counterfeiting and the new currency designs on Discovery or PBS or something a few years ago, and as I recall, the Treasury Dept. has a number of requirements for currency. One of them is the “crush test.” The bill has to survive being rolled up into a tight cylinder and then being crushed in a little metal tube by a heavy weight. This is why we don’t have the holographic appliques or other plastic patches that other nations’ money has. It’s probably also why our notes are cotton-based paper, and not some form of plastic.
The Australian bills would outlast paper currency in any such test. The hologram is no more brittle than the rest of the note, which is to say not at all.
I’ll bet the real reason is the “not invented here” syndrome.
I’m personally waiting to have “666” tattooed to my forehead, like Jack Chick predicts.
Well, you know what they say… it takes money to make money.
No. They tested plastic currency. It didn’t pass.
This is correct; the paper notes in the UK have a hologram on them.
Who’s they? Didn’t pass what? Why not?
That’s not to say that all loons are potential visionaries, though, is it? Some are just plain bonkers.
That doesn’t sound right. It would be like saying some US states couldn’t “do” plastic. The Euro is quite complicated and they would have to get new equipment in anyway. If I recall correctly it was because they tried plastic and no-one liked it. Too slippery and difficult to count quickly. Can’t find a cite but I’m sure there was a big study on what form the Euro notes should take. I’ll search further…
Hmm…and as soon as I post I find something! This says:
I guess I remembered incorrectly.
The infamous US BEP “crumple test”, which is mentioned earlier is a usual stumbling block. I saw that documentary too, in which they mentioned that the hologram couldn’t survive it. I wouldn’t doubt that the plastic polymer notes might have problems, too. The test in question is probably overkill - see description above - the tube they mash the bills into is really tiny, and they basically apply enough pressure to turn the bill into a little pellet. They have to be able to uncrumple it from that treatment intact. It’s a far worse mangling than any bill is likely to get IRL, and it might be reasonable to reduce the requirement a little bit, but the current standards BEP has in place say that bill designs have to be able to pass it.
The cocaine test!
They are also different colors which makes it a hell of a lot easier to work out what note your holding without having to look at the numbers.
Now, I have never, ever, understood the logic behind this.
American money has the value of the bill on every single corner in gigantic numbers. If you can see the color of the bill, you can also see the numbers - and my brain is able to determine that a piece of paper with a giant “20” on it is worth $20 faster than it can think, “okay, blue is 10, pink is 50…”
Not only that, but one can still read the numbers in low-light conditions when colors get washed out.
I also saw the documentary, and they showed the hologram after it had been crushed.
Yuck!
Has to do with the angle of illumination and reflection. A hologram needs to stay flat in order to work. Of course reducing the thing to a pellet doesn’t do a lot of good to its flatness.
IIRC Mylar smooths itself out if its folded or crumpled. I wonder if that stuff would survive the BEP test?