Cash is backwards
Crossposted from https://lemmy.one/comment/283051:
Does anyone else think it’s a little backwards that the large denominations are fragile paper bills, but the small ones are metal coins sometimes worth less than the metal in the coin? Shouldn’t the large denominations be coins, which last longer, and the small denominations be bills, which are easier to carry in large quantities?
9 replies
Hsac?
Durable coins that won't wear out for small purchases (back when things actually cost pennies), and paper bills for large purchases with the anti-counterfeiting measure of being able to have large, intricate designs.
I'm not sure how important it is for small denominations to be durable, since a pocketful of loose change is practically disposable for a lot of people. As for anti-counterfeiting measures, I think coins have a lot of potential.
It would be a dead giveaway that you're lugging a lot of money around.
I think people could figure out how to carry rolls of coins stealthily. In any case, robbers already have ways to identify relatively low risk, high reward targets and people just openly wear expensive clothes and jewelry all the time.
Lol, could you imagine if it was this way in the movies when people are carrying around millions in briefcases? Just suitcases full of coins making all kinds of noise.
In HongKong, and I'm sure in some other places, paper currency is actually made of bearer bonds:
Note (see what I did) the small text of "Promises to pay the bearer on demand at its office here", that's when/where the bank gives you coins, or their Monopoly looking-ass 10 dollar bill, issued by the government.