Posted on 06/24/2015 5:41:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
A woman will be on the new $10 bill, bumping Alexander Hamilton aside. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew says he will choose the woman by year's end, based on "input from the public."
In one survey of the "public," the first female chief of the Cherokee Nation, Wilma Mankiller, placed fourth. I understand the wish to counter sexism prevalent in early America, but "Mankiller?" The name alone probably reveals something about the attitude of some of those voters.
Fortunately, more voted for Harriet Tubman. Tubman escaped slavery to become a leader of the Underground Railroad, then repeatedly returned to slave territory to help others escape. Tubman would be a good choice. What's more libertarian than helping people escape slavery and resist being governed without their consent?
But I feel bad about Alexander Hamilton.
He was courageous in the American Revolution, co-wrote the Federalist Papers that defended the new Constitution and helped put the new republic on a sound financial footing when it was deep in debt. He was a poor immigrant with an absent father who rose to advise George Washington and become one of the most important men in the nation.
Hamilton was also decent and fair-minded enough to singlehandedly stop a mob when it threatened to harm an unarmed Tory. In his spare time, he founded the newspaper New York Post, now headquartered a few floors below my office.
Hamilton biographer Ron Chernow, who opposes demoting Hamilton, argues that "Hamilton was undeniably the most influential person in our history who never attained the presidency."
Before the talk of replacing Hamilton, the movement to put a woman on U.S. currency targeted the $20 bill. That would be a better choice. Andrew Jackson was a violent man who ignored a Supreme Court ruling and killed thousands of Indians by forcing them off their land. But the government says it's not ready to replace the $20 bill.
Jackson opposed central banking, founded in the U.S. by Hamilton. So maybe there's poetic justice in Hamilton getting pushed aside by the central currency-printing bureaucracy he helped create.
But none of us would have to fight about whom to put on currency if it weren't all created and printed by a central government. Bitcoin is private currency that comes in many forms. People who prefer dogs as the symbol of their money can even use the digital currency Dogecoin.
Private currencies aren't just a 21st-century novelty. Numerous banks used to print their own competing currencies. Contrary to the claims of John Kenneth Galbraith and other left-wing economists, private competition tended to prevent runaway inflation and deep depressions.
Economist Thomas Hogan writes, "There were 1,600 private corporations issuing banknotes and an estimated 8,370 varieties of notes" in the 19th century, while the U.S. economy "grew at an average rate of 4.4 percent per year [and] the price level remained roughly constant."
The central bank known as the Federal Reserve was supposed to provide greater stability, but it didn't. Just 16 years after the U.S. created the Fed, the Great Depression began. And since then, the U.S. dollar lost 96 percent of its value.
Since government can't run the rest of the economy wisely, why let it be in charge of money itself?
The money printing that central banks love -- to pay government's bills and try to trick, er, stimulate the economy into greater activity -- isn't real wealth creation. It just means more pieces of paper float around representing the same amount of wealth. It distorts markets, creating things like housing bubbles, and eventually it will mean inflation. It also lets politicians think they can ignore our debt ($18 trillion and counting) and keep spending.
Let private currencies compete and not only will we be on firmer ground financially, but also everybody will be free to choose whether they want to use Tubmans, Hamiltons or Mankillers to pay their bills.
Some people want Eleanor Roosevelt. Some want Ayn Rand. A movement on Twitter wants Caitlyn Jenner on their money.
Great! Go for it. If we had private, competing currencies, all these options could coexist. Choice is always better than the government's one-size-fits-all solution.
I see a lot of Five and One dollar bills in my future. I will refuse the new specie.
She worked side-by-side with Reagan to help put an end to Soviet Communism.
>>Why make this costly change to the Ten Dollar bill?<<
1. Like banning the Confederate battle flag, it uses a symbol to cover up a real problem.
2. Create another phony issue to divide people into camps.
3. Increase anger because someone’s choice wasn’t selected.
4. Another excuse to stop teaching history.
5. Because Hamilton is white and he is a man.
The obvious choice to placate those who want to replace Hamilton is a multiracial, LBGT, atheist. Drum roll, please.
Rachel Dolezal
Last time I looked I didn’t see anything WRONG with Hamilton on the $10 bill. If its not broke, don’t fix it.
As I see it, yet another MAJOR waste of money to go through this unnecessary change to our currency.
The next thing we hear, odumbo will INSIST, by executive order, that his picture be on all of our money. Now THAT would be a gross waste of money, as has been his presidency.
None of these people reach 10% of the significance of Alexander Hamilton.
This is an attempt to give unearned credit for the sake of aggrieved feelings.
How about the British put President Reagan on their currency and take Queen ElizabethII off?
The whole thing is a bunch of bs
I think some folks are reaching their tipping point and are mad as hell and rightfully so. I didn’t see that as rude, I am seeing it as someone who has been pushed and pushed, and doesn’t want to take it anymore.
Yes a whole lot of BS. And with the buying power of the dollar falling we could all use new $500, $1000 or $5000 bills.
Tubman was a Republican.
UH OH! There is no Black on money! No gay/lezzbo! No trans! No towelhead! No BI! No Native American! No atheist! No witch!
Which one will be next to demand a place on money so that we will have to look at it each time we pay and be reminded of how evil and privileged we are?
Replacing Andrew Jackson with a Cherokee woman named “Mankiller” would be an ironic choice. But I have no idea why they chose the $10 instead.
They need to develop a $3 bill and put Bruce Jenner on it.
I admit it, I laughed.
I see a quid pro quo in there!
I don’t doubt it, since most blacks at that time were
I vote for Paula Jones or Gennifer Flowers.
Enough of this bs lets keep it the way it is
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.