Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read first

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

jamesrage said:

Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Fredrick Douglas, Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, Martian Luther King Jr and so on.

Before anyone says we only put presidents on our currency, Here are some examples-

Ben Franklin $100 and a .50 coin
Alexander Hamilton $10
Susan B Anthony $1
Sacagawea $1
Chief Onepapa: $5 silver certificate
Daniel Webster: $10 United States note
Lews & Clark: $10 United States Note
VP Thomas Hendricks: $10 Silver Certificate
Michael Hillegas, 1st US Treasurer: $10 Gold Certificate
Former Treasury Secretary Hugh McCulloch: $20 National Bank Note
Former Comptroller of the currency John J. Knox, $50 National Bank Note
Thomas Hart Benton, $100 Gold Certificate
Former Chief Justice John Marshall, $500 Federal Reserve Note
Various 1st ladies on $10 dollar gold coins
Booker T. Washinton .50 cent commemorative coin



I say yes. Their contributions to this country are just as important as the other people we put on our currency.PLus if we can put state symbols, animals and other things on our currency surely we can put black civil rights and other historical figures on our currency.

Click to expand...

As long as you aren't talking about the bigots Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, I certainly agree that actual civil rights leaders should be on currency.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

X Factor said:

Agreed. Went to the UK recently and their currency is colorful and different shapes and sizes. I even liked their 1 pound coin. It was heavier and thicker than the other coins so you knew just by feel, what it was.

Click to expand...

They're changing the £1 coin! Personally, I has a sad.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

MLK deserves a spot on our currency IMO.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

lizzie said:

I dont even care who. They could put an anonymous john doe on the currency, and it would make no difference to me, as long as it was legal currency for exchange.

Click to expand...

Just to be an instigator :2razz: even Osama Bin Laden?

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

SmokeAndMirrors said:

They're changing the £1 coin! Personally, I has a sad.

Click to expand...

The U.S. Govt has tried several times to get us to accept a dollar coin and we won't, but I think Americans would warn to a coin like the pound. There something oddly satisfying about paying with those, like you're in a whole other time period where you can get practically anything with just a pocket of change.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

americanwoman said:

Just to be an instigator :2razz: even Osama Bin Laden?

Click to expand...

Even Osama Bin Laden. I don't have any emotional attachment to currency. It's just a legal means of trading imo. I don't associate a dollar bill with anything of greatness- just commerce.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

X Factor said:

The U.S. Govt has tried several times to get us to accept a dollar coin and we won't, but I think Americans would warn to a coin like the pound. There something oddly satisfying about paying with those, like you're in a whole other time period where you can get practically anything with just a pocket of change.

Click to expand...

I think so too. I say get rid of the penny and make a $1 coin. There is something nice about it, especially when it's heftier than the lesser value coins. I think if they gave a little more attention to design in that way, maaaybe Americans would eventually warm to it.

Less waste too. Although dollars are quite tough, they will certainly never last as long as metal, and pennies are just something to wind up in your couch cushion these days. :lol:

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

SmokeAndMirrors said:

I think so too. I say get rid of the penny and make a $1 coin. There is something nice about it, especially when it's heftier than the lesser value coins. I think if they gave a little more attention to design in that way, maaaybe Americans would eventually warm to it.

Less waste too. Although dollars are quite tough, they will certainly never last as long as metal, and pennies are just something to wind up in your couch cushion these days. :lol:

Click to expand...

I think I remember seeing somewhere that pennies cost more to make now than what they're worth.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

SmokeAndMirrors said:

I think so too. I say get rid of the penny and make a $1 coin. There is something nice about it, especially when it's heftier than the lesser value coins. I think if they gave a little more attention to design in that way, maaaybe Americans would eventually warm to it.

Less waste too. Although dollars are quite tough, they will certainly never last as long as metal, and pennies are just something to wind up in your couch cushion these days. :lol:

Click to expand...

I disagree. We've tried dollar coins, and Americans simply don't want them. Not sure why, but other societies liking similar concepts there doesn't mean anything here. I think the added weight in pockets and purses is a factor.

If forced on us (and $1 bill eliminated), people will get used to them simply because there will be no alternative, but that's not the same as acceptance or preference.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

X Factor said:

I think I remember seeing somewhere that pennies cost more to make now than what they're worth.

Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised?

Down with the penny!

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

jamesrage said:

Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Fredrick Douglas, Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, Martian Luther King Jr and so on.

Before anyone says we only put presidents on our currency, Here are some examples-

Ben Franklin $100 and a .50 coin
Alexander Hamilton $10
Susan B Anthony $1
Sacagawea $1
Chief Onepapa: $5 silver certificate
Daniel Webster: $10 United States note
Lews & Clark: $10 United States Note
VP Thomas Hendricks: $10 Silver Certificate
Michael Hillegas, 1st US Treasurer: $10 Gold Certificate
Former Treasury Secretary Hugh McCulloch: $20 National Bank Note
Former Comptroller of the currency John J. Knox, $50 National Bank Note
Thomas Hart Benton, $100 Gold Certificate
Former Chief Justice John Marshall, $500 Federal Reserve Note
Various 1st ladies on $10 dollar gold coins
Booker T. Washinton .50 cent commemorative coin



I say yes. Their contributions to this country are just as important as the other people we put on our currency.PLus if we can put state symbols, animals and other things on our currency surely we can put black civil rights and other historical figures on our currency.

Click to expand...

Booker T. Washington was black. But I see nothing wrong in it. However I would like it to be a coin or something in use today.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

jamesrage said:

Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Fredrick Douglas, Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, Martian Luther King Jr and so on.

Before anyone says we only put presidents on our currency, Here are some examples-

Ben Franklin $100 and a .50 coin
Alexander Hamilton $10
Susan B Anthony $1
Sacagawea $1
Chief Onepapa: $5 silver certificate
Daniel Webster: $10 United States note
Lews & Clark: $10 United States Note
VP Thomas Hendricks: $10 Silver Certificate
Michael Hillegas, 1st US Treasurer: $10 Gold Certificate
Former Treasury Secretary Hugh McCulloch: $20 National Bank Note
Former Comptroller of the currency John J. Knox, $50 National Bank Note
Thomas Hart Benton, $100 Gold Certificate
Former Chief Justice John Marshall, $500 Federal Reserve Note
Various 1st ladies on $10 dollar gold coins
Booker T. Washinton .50 cent commemorative coin



I say yes. Their contributions to this country are just as important as the other people we put on our currency.PLus if we can put state symbols, animals and other things on our currency surely we can put black civil rights and other historical figures on our currency.

Click to expand...

There is a black civil rights leader on one of the coins you listed. Booker T. Washington, on the 50 cent commemorative coin.

And though he is the only one, there were four African American Registers of the Treasury whose signatures appeared on currency. They were Blanche K. Bruce, Judson W. Lyons, William T. Vernon and James C. Napier. Until the series 1923 currency, the two signatures on almost all currency were of the Treasurer and the Register. During this period four of the 17 registers were African American. The fifth African American whose signature appeared on currency was Azie Taylor Morton. Morton was the 36th Treasurer of the United States. She served from September 12, 1977, to January 20, 1981.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

radcen said:

I disagree. We've tried dollar coins, and Americans simply don't want them. Not sure why, but other societies liking similar concepts there doesn't mean anything here. I think the added weight in pockets and purses is a factor.

If forced on us (and $1 bill eliminated), people will get used to them simply because there will be no alternative, but that's not the same as acceptance or preference.

Click to expand...

I think it's a trade off, really.

You get rid of £1 and £2 coins pretty quickly, because you build up enough to pay for something pretty quickly. With small bills, it's tempting to just keep using bigger ones until you wind up with a billion $1 bills in your wallet to the point where it looks like you got a butt cheek implant. :lol:

I know it hasn't gone over well in the US in the past, and perhaps it never will. But there's definitely something nice about the thicker coins of higher value, I think. Its design is part of why I like it. You don't really have to even look at it to get the correct change -- it's just obvious by touch which ones are the higher value coins.

The smaller value ones make no sense at all in terms of size or weight, but £1 and £2 coins do.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

SmokeAndMirrors said:

I think it's a trade off, really.

You get rid of £1 and £2 coins pretty quickly, because you build up enough to pay for something pretty quickly. With small bills, it's tempting to just keep using bigger ones until you wind up with a billion $1 bills in your wallet to the point where it looks like you got a butt cheek implant. :lol:

I know it hasn't gone over well in the US in the past, and perhaps it never will. But there's definitely something nice about the thicker coins of higher value, I think. Its design is part of why I like it. You don't really have to even look at it to get the correct change -- it's just obvious by touch which ones are the higher value coins.

The smaller value ones make no sense at all in terms of size or weight, but £1 and £2 coins do.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree, and from an objective standpoint coins for smaller denominations make infinite sense, but I just don't see it happening anytime soon. *I* know it makes sense, but even I don't want to eliminate $1 bills.

We did have larger $1 coins in the Silver Dollar, but that didn't take off. Was considered more of a novelty to be hoarded. To be fair, that was a few decades ago, of course.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

Kobie said:

Why not?

Click to expand...

You got two likes for having the chutzpah to ask? :lamo

I like that...and so, I shall explain.

Are we doing this to honor or to appease and what is the motivation, more appeasement? Because to me the "honor" reeks of condescension.

If to honor are we certain it is an honor or will it be an addition to the hagiography of that individual? For instance, does everyone here know Rosa Parks wasn't some little old black lady with tired feet but an activist heavily involved in the civil rights movement? That MLK was hoisted up as a figurehead which thanks to his oratory skills and calls of non-violence made whites at that time more comfortable with the situation all the while plenty more unknown faces contributed and sacrificed much more to the movement?

Why limit it to only blacks? And why at this time is this question being brought up? and what "contributions" exactly to society as a whole did these "civil rights" leaders bring?

Nat Turner for leading a slave rebellion which ended in 60 deaths? and Freddie Douglas, for what? For being literate? For telling his harrowing tale? If killing white people was a celebratory cause I'd much rather see Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull or Geronimo even replace old Ben on the C-note.

Truth be told, I can't remember the last time I actually held cash, and I don't see myself changing this policy anytime soon. My contention with the whole thing deals with the motivation behind it, the whole thing seems a bit patronizing...

*and to come back to this -- Why mention race at all if this is truly about contributions to society? Does it matter? What about Cesar Chavez? Doesn't he merit? How many lives did his work help to improve? But it's gotta be black's we single out for merit why? Because they are black moreso than because of their contribution.

Had this been a question about putting people who contributed to society on our money, than I'd say, great, but when you isolate it to a single race, well, to me that's racist and goes against the words of MLK's dream of judging by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

ChezC3 said:

You got two likes for having the chutzpah to ask? :lamo

I like that...and so, I shall explain.

Are we doing this to honor or to appease and what is the motivation, more appeasement? Because to me the "honor" reeks of condescension.

If to honor are we certain it is an honor or will it be an addition to the hagiography of that individual? For instance, does everyone here know Rosa Parks wasn't some little old black lady with tired feet but an activist heavily involved in the civil rights movement? That MLK was hoisted up as a figurehead which thanks to his oratory skills and calls of non-violence made whites at that time more comfortable with the situation all the while plenty more unknown faces contributed and sacrificed much more to the movement?

Why limit it to only blacks? And why at this time is this question being brought up? and what "contributions" exactly to society as a whole did these "civil rights" leaders bring?

Nat Turner for leading a slave rebellion which ended in 60 deaths? and Freddie Douglas, for what? For being literate? For telling his harrowing tale? If killing white people was a celebratory cause I'd much rather see Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull or Geronimo even replace old Ben on the C-note.

Truth be told, I can't remember the last time I actually held cash, and I don't see myself changing this policy anytime soon. My contention with the whole thing deals with the motivation behind it, the whole thing seems a bit patronizing...

*and to come back to this -- Why mention race at all if this is truly about contributions to society? Does it matter? What about Cesar Chavez? Doesn't he merit? How many lives did his work help to improve? But it's gotta be black's we single out for merit why? Because they are black moreso than because of their contribution.

Had this been a question about putting people who contributed to society on our money, than I'd say, great, but when you isolate it to a single race, well, to me that's racist and goes against the words of MLK's dream of judging by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Click to expand...

... Hmmm... interesting. Muddy the conversation and turn one race against another so that minorities stay off the currency in the meantime. It's better to go in historical order and put black folks on the currency before we start discussing the contributions of other people who are still being attacked and reviled today. It's not as if the pro-states-right-wing of this country would even consider discussing a supposed commie like Chavez 22 years after his death. Let's focus on the groups of people they've stopped trying to revile.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

I noted some are against this. Why?

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

Hatuey said:

... Hmmm... interesting. Muddy the conversation and turn one race against another so that minorities stay off the currency in the meantime. It's better to go in historical order and put black folks on the currency before we start discussing the contributions of other people who are still being attacked and reviled today. It's not as if the pro-states-right-wing of this country would even consider discussing a supposed commie like Chavez 22 years after his death. Let's focus on the groups of people they've stopped trying to revile.

Click to expand...

Muddy...interesting choice of words...

Better to go historical? OK, than like I said Crazy Horse, Geronimo, Sitting Bull....Considering the land from which you type was theirs before it was ours I suspect their contribution should be considered quantifiably greater than all. Right?

Latino's are reviled? Oh, you're confusing Latino's with Illegals. All Latino's are illegals in your book?

And yet nothing is said on th greater point I made that actions and deeds are what should be celebrated and accentuated not race. Way to heal the racial divides...

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

ChezC3 said:

You got two likes for having the chutzpah to ask? :lamo

I like that...and so, I shall explain.

Are we doing this to honor or to appease and what is the motivation, more appeasement? Because to me the "honor" reeks of condescension.

If to honor are we certain it is an honor or will it be an addition to the hagiography of that individual? For instance, does everyone here know Rosa Parks wasn't some little old black lady with tired feet but an activist heavily involved in the civil rights movement? That MLK was hoisted up as a figurehead which thanks to his oratory skills and calls of non-violence made whites at that time more comfortable with the situation all the while plenty more unknown faces contributed and sacrificed much more to the movement?

Why limit it to only blacks? And why at this time is this question being brought up? and what "contributions" exactly to society as a whole did these "civil rights" leaders bring?

Nat Turner for leading a slave rebellion which ended in 60 deaths? and Freddie Douglas, for what? For being literate? For telling his harrowing tale? If killing white people was a celebratory cause I'd much rather see Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull or Geronimo even replace old Ben on the C-note.

Truth be told, I can't remember the last time I actually held cash, and I don't see myself changing this policy anytime soon. My contention with the whole thing deals with the motivation behind it, the whole thing seems a bit patronizing...

*and to come back to this -- Why mention race at all if this is truly about contributions to society? Does it matter? What about Cesar Chavez? Doesn't he merit? How many lives did his work help to improve? But it's gotta be black's we single out for merit why? Because they are black moreso than because of their contribution.

Had this been a question about putting people who contributed to society on our money, than I'd say, great, but when you isolate it to a single race, well, to me that's racist and goes against the words of MLK's dream of judging by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Click to expand...

Who said anything about "isolating it to a single race"? Nowhere in the OP or anywhere else in the thread did anyone say "put black civil rights leaders on our money and NOBODY ELSE, especially not Mexicans."

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

11Bravo said:

As long as you aren't talking about the bigots Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, I certainly agree that actual civil rights leaders should be on currency.

Click to expand...

You have to be dead for a certain number of years before your portrait can be on currency. Plus it is not hard to find someone way better than those two race parasites to put on our currency.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

X Factor said:

I think I remember seeing somewhere that pennies cost more to make now than what they're worth.

Click to expand...

That is true.But at the same time paper money costs between 4.9 cents to 12.3 cents per note to make.So this idea that we are going red or wasting money to make currency is wasting us a **** load of money is absurd argument.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

ChezC3 said:

Muddy...interesting choice of words...

Click to expand...

I call it as I see it.

Better to go historical? OK, than like I said Crazy Horse, Geronimo, Sitting Bull....

Click to expand...

Still making my point for me? Good. Wait... what do any of those people have to do with civil rights? Nothing? Lol.

Considering the land from which you type was theirs before it was ours I suspect their contribution should be considered quantifiably greater than all. Right?

Latino's are reviled? Oh, you're confusing Latino's with Illegals. All Latino's are illegals in your book?

Click to expand...

If your reading comprehension is really that much of an issue, you really should stop posting.

And yet nothing is said on th greater point I made that actions and deeds are what should be celebrated and accentuated not race. Way to heal the racial divides...

Click to expand...

Utter nonsense. Your post was an attempt to muddy the issue by asking irrelevant "What about this person!? What about these people!?" - it's the usual non-argument made by people who have no interest in putting something other than whites on our currency. :shrug:

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

Kobie said:

Who said anything about "isolating it to a single race"? Nowhere in the OP or anywhere else in the thread did anyone say "put black civil rights leaders on our money and NOBODY ELSE, especially not Mexicans."

Click to expand...

This is the best you could come back with, eh?

What did the title read? Did it get into specifics or just the general?

So to answer -- jamesrage.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

Hatuey said:

I call it as I see it.

Click to expand...

Oh, I see...:wink2:

Still making my point for me? Good. Wait... what do any of those people have to do with civil rights? Nothing? Lol.

Click to expand...

Wha?? :lamo

If your reading comprehension is really that much of an issue, you really should stop posting.

Click to expand...

But it isn't, so I won't.

Utter nonsense. Your post was an attempt to muddy the issue by asking irrelevant "What about this person!? What about these people!?" - it's the usual non-argument made by people who have no interest in putting something other than whites on our currency. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Yes, your whole presumptuous position is just that. Nonsense.

Re: Should we put black civil rights and historical figures on our currency? Read fir

ChezC3 said:

This is the best you could come back with, eh?

What did the title read? Did it get into specifics or just the general?

So to answer -- jamesrage.

Click to expand...

Please link to the exact sentence in which jamesrage says "black civil rights leaders and ONLY black civil rights leaders." You do realize that arguing for one thing does not preclude supporting other things?