
Hamilton to stay on $10; Tubman replacing Jackson - baehaus
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/treasurys-lew-to-announce-hamilton-to-stay-on-10-bill-222204
======
orik
I really like Andrew Jackson, it's too bad he's going instead of Hamilton.

Can't believe they want to take Lincoln off the 5$ bill though. Why can't we
just add new denominations of currency into the system? Bring back the
500$/1000$/5000$/10000$ bills? Perhaps instead add a 25$ bill and a 200$/250$
bill?

~~~
gradys
Adding $25 USD bills would break the greedy choice property for making change.
Making $40 in change using a greedy strategy would mean selecting a 25, a 10,
and a 5, while the optimal choice is to select two 20s.

~~~
unprepare
what about change for 50?

~~~
mcphage
It would be fewer bills than without the $25, but the greedy strategy would
still work for both (without, you'd get 3 bills: $20, $20, $10, and that's the
optimal). Whereas change for $40, the greedy strategy will give you 3 bills:
$25, $10, $5—which is more than the optimal 2 bills.

~~~
unprepare
change of 50 in two bills and change of 40 in three, is less optimal than
change of 50 in three and 40 in two?

~~~
mcphage
It's not about comparing the number of bills vs. each other—it's not
surprising that adding an additional denomination lets you make change in
fewer bills. It's about whether the greedy algorithm for making change gets
you the optimum number. Currently it does, but if you add a $25 bill, it would
not.

Currently:

$40: greedy: $20, $20

    
    
      optimal: $20, $20
    
      is greedy optimal: Yes
    

$50:

    
    
      greedy: $20, $20, $10
    
      optimal: $20, $20, $10
    
      is greedy optimal: Yes
    

Including a $25 bill:

$40:

    
    
      greedy: $25, $10, $5
    
      optimal: $20, $20
    
      is greedy optimal: No
    

$50:

    
    
      greedy: $25, $25
    
      optimal: $25, $25
    
      is greedy optimal: Yes

------
anderspitman
"the updated $20 bill isn't expected to be issued until 2030 at the earliest,
according to a report from CNN; citing the lengthy approval process by the
Advanced Counterfeit Deterrence steering committee"

~~~
nodesocket
Seriously, how does it take 14 years to verify a design and protect it against
counterfeit? SpaceX sent vehicles into space and landed them back here on
earth on a moving drone platform in the middle of the Atlantic in less time.

~~~
maxerickson
10 years of it could just be resting on laurels. If the current design resists
counterfeiting well enough, there's not much justification for making a new
one yet.

I'm not saying that's the explanation, just speculating.

~~~
jdavis703
Do you want to pay more taxes to upgrade something utilitarian for purely
aesthetic reasons?

------
x1798DE
Ugh. I frankly don't like the idea of having people on the bills at all. I'd
love to see just distinct abstract shapes.

I was also going to make a dig at them for changing purely superficial
characteristics before actually creating accessible money for the blind, but
apparently starting in 2019 there will be tactile features introduced, so, I
guess they put me in my place! Good on them.

------
hooloovoo_zoo
Am I the only one who finds trading the image of a former slave for goods and
services to be in slightly poor taste? There's no question Harriet Tubman was
a great lady, but I'm not sure this is the best way to honor her.

~~~
evanb
There's no question that Kackson was a good President, but isn't trading the
image of a lifelong slaveholder for goods and services in poor taste?

~~~
hooloovoo_zoo
I didn't say we should keep Jackson....

~~~
runamok
He's flipping your "bad taste" question back on you. Jefferson _and_ Jackson
have been on currency for decades and in their time treated people as currency
and no one blinked.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery)

------
aorth
Maybe in 150 years they'll put Edward Snowden — or a similar activist — on a
bill. It tends to take people a century or two to recognize the value of
contributions made by these type of people.

~~~
knodi123
You seriously think we'll still have bills in 150 years?

~~~
cmdrfred
I hope so, or something similarly anonymous.

------
OrwellianChild
Secretary of the Treasury has an official announcement on Medium:
[https://medium.com/@USTreasury/an-open-letter-from-
secretary...](https://medium.com/@USTreasury/an-open-letter-from-secretary-
lew-672cfd591d02#.lhm3rivbg)

------
timdellinger
My vote is to put Sally Ride on the $20 bill.

------
qq66
Interesting choice of Tubman. Is she the most important woman in American
history? I don't know that much about her, I'll read up on Wikipedia later
today.

------
PascalsMugger
It's all about the Tubmans baby.

------
dang
Url changed from [http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/20/11469320/harriet-tubman-
wi...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/20/11469320/harriet-tubman-will-replace-
andrew-jackson-on-the-20-bill), which points to this.

------
angryasian
Why can't we just put great american's on our money vs trying to shoehorn
someone just because of their gender. Our currency should be a celebration of
great people regardless. I understand Tubman's contributions to a very dark
time in our history but I think if we were to celebrate equality, Susan B
Anthony would be a better choice.

FDR would be the biggest missing person on our currency in my opinion.

