The quarter is the biggest problem with this plan. There’s just too much stuff that runs on quarters and quarters themselves as a currency denomination have too much cultural staying power.
Unfortunately, there being a 25¢ coin rather than the more globally-common 0.20 piece means that it isn’t practical to retire the nickel because it will still be possible to get non-multiples of 10¢.
$1 notes are important, not because of any reason in the US (dollar coins would work equally well in almost any application), but because the US dollar circulates widely in foreign countries that are suffering hyperinflation of their local currencies and have thus informally dollarised. There, US coinage is basically non-existent meaning the lowest denomination that can be transacted in USD cash is $1. See the situation in Zimbabwe where American banknotes circulate until they literally fall apart or the ink has all faded away off.
So the existence of a $1 note is paramount to keeping the economies of these countries going. It would be impossible to conduct business if the smallest denomination is $5 and your $4 an hour salary is paid in cash.
Remember, as unfortunate as it is, much of the US’s monetary policy is driven by the fact that the US dollar isn’t just America’s currency. It’s the entire world’s currency.
Every pay phone in America cost a dime when I was little. Then, by the time I was old enough to need to carry around change for a pay phone, all of them only took quarters. Do you know how many millions of pay phones there used to be? They somehow found it cost-efficient to modify almost every single one of them in the entire country. After the Bell system was broken up.
During the era of payphones, a quarter was still significant money so it was still worth the time to adjust the machinery. Nowadays, there are typically only four machines that people regularly interact with that accept quarters:
Laundry machines, which increasingly don’t take coins at all and instead have card readers on them
Parking meters, which also increasingly get replaced with signs telling you to pay online using a website or app
Vending machines, which also usually have card readers.
Self-checkout machines at grocery stores.
These machines take coins, but generally deal in such small-dollar amount terms that replacing the coinage mechanisms just isn’t worth it in 2025. That’s the biggest issue with coinage reform plans. Hell, not even when the UK decimalised their currency did they change the size and weight of the coins, for exactly this reason. An old shilling was the same size, weight, and value as a new 5p coin and no changes had to be made to the machines.
Now, the problem is that while coin usage (and cash usage in general) is on the decline, these systems must still function for the percentage of people who want to use cash. And you definitely have a moral right to use cash and be able to conduct your daily life in cash if you want, either for privacy reasons, or because for small transactions it’s just simpler.
There’s just too much stuff that runs on quarters […] too much cultural staying power.
“Because that’s the way it is” is never a good reason not to do something new.
It’s always the case that things don’t change. Until they suddenly and unexpectedly do. Then in hind sight it seems obvious they should have changed long earlier.
US dollar circulates widely in foreign countries […] There, US coinage is basically non-existent
There’s no real reason coins couldn’t circulate in foreign markets. They don’t because the value to weight ratio is worse for shipping. But if the coin value went up to a dollar, and the dollar note wasn’t an option anymore, foreign markets would adapt just fine. Especially since the coins would circulate for decades longer.
“Because that’s the way it is” is very often a good reason not to do something new. That’s because of the human aspect of introducing these reforms. There’d better be a very good reason to change or you will encounter a lot of public opposition just because people don’t like change.
There is no reason that coins don’t can’t circulate in foreign markets but the fact remains that they don’t (Edit: for lack of infrastructure to support the logistical challenges of distributing coins). You cannot explain that away. It is simply not possible to adapt in the situations I describe. Saying that “they’ll adapt” is a very hand-wavey excuse that doesn’t address the issues with retiring this denomination. Without a $1 note, people in the countries that need it will just not use the US dollar and will choose a currency that has the denominations they need. In Zimbabwe’s case, people would be forced off the US dollar and onto a currency that is willing to provide them with the small change that they need. In that case, probably the South African rand.
Everything is the way it is. Yet things still change. Literally everything changes eventually. So no, it’s not a good reason, merely an empty excuse. “The human aspect”, is a less insulting sounding way of saying “People don’t like change.” Which is true, but as I already said, every thing changes anyway and people deal with it and adapt every time.
There is no reason that coins don’t circulate in foreign markets but the fact remains that they don’t.
That sentence is literal nonsense. As in, it doesn’t make sense.
If there’s no reason coins don’t circulate, then they would be circulating; Or could be made to circulate, with no real resistance or effort.
Then you go on to further not explain why the dollar note is necessary in some markets, and they wouldn’t be able to adapt.
That’s a very hand-wavey way to create a roadblock excuse.
These things don’t need to make sense. They very much don’t make sense. They are still real phenomena that need to be dealt with. You’re expressing a sentiment that I find is very common on Lemmy—that if it doesn’t make sense then it can be ignored.
If public sentiment is against a change that is perceived to be arbitrary and without benefit then you will encounter very real public opposition. There will be political repercussions to making this change. You will be slandered by pundits in the news and you personally will gain a reputation as a hard-ass who makes things hard for no reason (regardless of whether that’s true or justified), which causes problems for your future job security as now politicians think they can score easy political points by firing you. It wouldn’t be a consideration on Planet Vulkan, but on Earth, this effect is real and must be considered, whether you think it’s logical or not.
Coins don’t circulate in foreign exchange markets. They haven’t circulated for over a century. There are, however, reasons for this. You’ve already correctly pointed out that one of them is because coins are heavier. The second reason is because ATMs don’t dispense coins but they do dispense notes. When people go to the bank and withdraw money, they don’t receive coins unless specially requested. And despite the need for small change in these foreign countries, the logistical challenges of providing coins to them over notes are still too high for coins to find their way into circulation. Coins enter circulation in the US when businesses order them from the bank, which in turn orders them from the Federal Reserve, which receives them from the Mint. Banks abroad don’t bother with coins because they’re far more difficult to transport and distribute than notes, making it an unprofitable service to offer account holders, and they can’t just order them from the Federal Reserve—they need to go through a third party which increases costs. In addition to that, USD banknote-counting machines are prevalent worldwide. It’s rare to encounter a USD coin-counting machine abroad. The logistical network to distribute USD cash globally is built for notes, not coins, and that’s why trying to introduce coins in a foreign market is like trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. You’re going to find that every single step is going to be ever so slightly more frustrating than distributing notes, which all adds up to the point of impracticality.
You just eloquently explained some reasons. Why did you say there’s no reason coins aren’t circulated in foreign markets? That was your statement that made no sense. Not because people’s emotional decisions don’t make sense, but because the literal meaning of the sentance you used didn’t make sense.
And yes those things are solvable problems. Thinking they’re barriers is just a symptom of the pervasive hopeless perspective that’s popular right now.
Breaking that perspective is the only hope I have for this presidency. I hope he changes so much in such terrible ways, that people will realize major pervasive change is possible. And after so much gets fucked up, it’ll be an imperative to over correct the damage he’ll do, improving things to better than they were before.
I will edit my original comment. There is no reason that they couldn’t circulate in foreign exchange markets given the correct infrastructure. That infrastructure current doesn’t exist and to my knowledge would be unprofitable to construct.
The quarter is the biggest problem with this plan. There’s just too much stuff that runs on quarters and quarters themselves as a currency denomination have too much cultural staying power.
Unfortunately, there being a 25¢ coin rather than the more globally-common 0.20 piece means that it isn’t practical to retire the nickel because it will still be possible to get non-multiples of 10¢.
$1 notes are important, not because of any reason in the US (dollar coins would work equally well in almost any application), but because the US dollar circulates widely in foreign countries that are suffering hyperinflation of their local currencies and have thus informally dollarised. There, US coinage is basically non-existent meaning the lowest denomination that can be transacted in USD cash is $1. See the situation in Zimbabwe where American banknotes circulate until they literally fall apart or the ink has all faded away off.
So the existence of a $1 note is paramount to keeping the economies of these countries going. It would be impossible to conduct business if the smallest denomination is $5 and your $4 an hour salary is paid in cash.
Remember, as unfortunate as it is, much of the US’s monetary policy is driven by the fact that the US dollar isn’t just America’s currency. It’s the entire world’s currency.
Every pay phone in America cost a dime when I was little. Then, by the time I was old enough to need to carry around change for a pay phone, all of them only took quarters. Do you know how many millions of pay phones there used to be? They somehow found it cost-efficient to modify almost every single one of them in the entire country. After the Bell system was broken up.
During the era of payphones, a quarter was still significant money so it was still worth the time to adjust the machinery. Nowadays, there are typically only four machines that people regularly interact with that accept quarters:
These machines take coins, but generally deal in such small-dollar amount terms that replacing the coinage mechanisms just isn’t worth it in 2025. That’s the biggest issue with coinage reform plans. Hell, not even when the UK decimalised their currency did they change the size and weight of the coins, for exactly this reason. An old shilling was the same size, weight, and value as a new 5p coin and no changes had to be made to the machines.
Now, the problem is that while coin usage (and cash usage in general) is on the decline, these systems must still function for the percentage of people who want to use cash. And you definitely have a moral right to use cash and be able to conduct your daily life in cash if you want, either for privacy reasons, or because for small transactions it’s just simpler.
“Because that’s the way it is” is never a good reason not to do something new.
It’s always the case that things don’t change. Until they suddenly and unexpectedly do. Then in hind sight it seems obvious they should have changed long earlier.
There’s no real reason coins couldn’t circulate in foreign markets. They don’t because the value to weight ratio is worse for shipping. But if the coin value went up to a dollar, and the dollar note wasn’t an option anymore, foreign markets would adapt just fine. Especially since the coins would circulate for decades longer.
“Because that’s the way it is” is very often a good reason not to do something new. That’s because of the human aspect of introducing these reforms. There’d better be a very good reason to change or you will encounter a lot of public opposition just because people don’t like change.
There is no reason that coins
don’tcan’t circulate in foreign markets but the fact remains that they don’t (Edit: for lack of infrastructure to support the logistical challenges of distributing coins). You cannot explain that away. It is simply not possible to adapt in the situations I describe. Saying that “they’ll adapt” is a very hand-wavey excuse that doesn’t address the issues with retiring this denomination. Without a $1 note, people in the countries that need it will just not use the US dollar and will choose a currency that has the denominations they need. In Zimbabwe’s case, people would be forced off the US dollar and onto a currency that is willing to provide them with the small change that they need. In that case, probably the South African rand.Everything is the way it is. Yet things still change. Literally everything changes eventually. So no, it’s not a good reason, merely an empty excuse. “The human aspect”, is a less insulting sounding way of saying “People don’t like change.” Which is true, but as I already said, every thing changes anyway and people deal with it and adapt every time.
That sentence is literal nonsense. As in, it doesn’t make sense.
If there’s no reason coins don’t circulate, then they would be circulating; Or could be made to circulate, with no real resistance or effort.
Then you go on to further not explain why the dollar note is necessary in some markets, and they wouldn’t be able to adapt.
That’s a very hand-wavey way to create a roadblock excuse.
These things don’t need to make sense. They very much don’t make sense. They are still real phenomena that need to be dealt with. You’re expressing a sentiment that I find is very common on Lemmy—that if it doesn’t make sense then it can be ignored.
If public sentiment is against a change that is perceived to be arbitrary and without benefit then you will encounter very real public opposition. There will be political repercussions to making this change. You will be slandered by pundits in the news and you personally will gain a reputation as a hard-ass who makes things hard for no reason (regardless of whether that’s true or justified), which causes problems for your future job security as now politicians think they can score easy political points by firing you. It wouldn’t be a consideration on Planet Vulkan, but on Earth, this effect is real and must be considered, whether you think it’s logical or not.
Coins don’t circulate in foreign exchange markets. They haven’t circulated for over a century. There are, however, reasons for this. You’ve already correctly pointed out that one of them is because coins are heavier. The second reason is because ATMs don’t dispense coins but they do dispense notes. When people go to the bank and withdraw money, they don’t receive coins unless specially requested. And despite the need for small change in these foreign countries, the logistical challenges of providing coins to them over notes are still too high for coins to find their way into circulation. Coins enter circulation in the US when businesses order them from the bank, which in turn orders them from the Federal Reserve, which receives them from the Mint. Banks abroad don’t bother with coins because they’re far more difficult to transport and distribute than notes, making it an unprofitable service to offer account holders, and they can’t just order them from the Federal Reserve—they need to go through a third party which increases costs. In addition to that, USD banknote-counting machines are prevalent worldwide. It’s rare to encounter a USD coin-counting machine abroad. The logistical network to distribute USD cash globally is built for notes, not coins, and that’s why trying to introduce coins in a foreign market is like trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. You’re going to find that every single step is going to be ever so slightly more frustrating than distributing notes, which all adds up to the point of impracticality.
You just eloquently explained some reasons. Why did you say there’s no reason coins aren’t circulated in foreign markets? That was your statement that made no sense. Not because people’s emotional decisions don’t make sense, but because the literal meaning of the sentance you used didn’t make sense.
And yes those things are solvable problems. Thinking they’re barriers is just a symptom of the pervasive hopeless perspective that’s popular right now.
Breaking that perspective is the only hope I have for this presidency. I hope he changes so much in such terrible ways, that people will realize major pervasive change is possible. And after so much gets fucked up, it’ll be an imperative to over correct the damage he’ll do, improving things to better than they were before.
I will edit my original comment. There is no reason that they couldn’t circulate in foreign exchange markets given the correct infrastructure. That infrastructure current doesn’t exist and to my knowledge would be unprofitable to construct.
Retire the penny, nickel, and dime, and only allow transactions in multiples of $0.25?
That’s one potential solution. It’s also just un-decimalising the dollar in its cash form.