National Review Blogger Terrified Of New Five-Dollar Bill

National Review blogger Mark Krikorian is all upset at the changes that have been made to U.S. currency, fingering the redesign of the five-dollar bill as the root cause of the weakening dollar, as opposed to...I don't know...the past seven years of economic and foreign policy.

Paper money has no intrinsic value, it can't be redeemed for gold or silver, you can't even make jewelry out of it. There's nothing behind it but the people's confidence in it, and when the government keeps changing its appearance, as it has with the successive redesigns over the past several years, that confidence is undermined.

Ehhh, I don't know. Seems to me that the best thing any single denomination of European currency had going for it was the image of hero flying-ace/beloved Little Prince author Antoine de Saint-Exupery on the fifty franc note. Nevertheless, opting, against all good aesthetic sense, for conversion to the bland Eurozone designs hasn't hurt the Euro against the dollar confidence-wise - and the Euro includes special design changes to accomodate the visually impaired as well.

Still Krikorian, like an unfrozen caveman lawyer, is against the new purple "5", saying: "If I wanted to use purple money, I'd move to a banana republic."

Speaking of banana republics, back when the same color was found painted on the index finger of every Iraqi who participated in their nation's pretend elections, his colleagues would have had you believe that purple ink would cure anything!

Comments

[PatrickforO]

Whatever it looks like, it only acts as money because we all agree it does. Interesting trivia - when Marco Polo came back from China, he brought Chinese paper money with him, worth quite a large sum. The authorities in Polo's city did not believe that pieces of paper could have the same value as metal coin and so burned the money.

[Susanfrom29]

It is such a relief to know that issues like these are occupying the great minds of our nation.

[Braveheart1]

Look, you can't be serious 24-7. It's really ok to have fun once in a great while.

[OnePartyEqualsTyranny]

If in 1957 I bought goods or services for $ 1.00 then in 2008 the same goods or services would cost me $7.67.

http://woodrow.mpls.frb.fed.us/research/data/us/calc/

[PuppaX]

I hope you didn't buy any food with that dollar, because it's probably gone bad.

[zippywpinhead]

not if he bought twinkies..­.

[jfor]

The decline in the dollar is George Washington's fault, he needs a makeover maybe a couple of tattoos, an ear guage, a nose piercing and a mohawk would do it.

[TrueBlueMajority]

I like the big purple 5

[TooLooze]

You know, if you look closely at the new paper money through a light, there is a hidden image of Bin Laden, Lee Harvey Oswald and Obama having a Satanic seance. It has some Biblical meaning, I'm sure.

[Cynth]

Ooops...me­ant to type "prop plane."

[Cynth]

Wait 'til the bills are redesigned to be useable for the blind & sight-impaired. Krikorian will be on the next prop plan headed for a banana republic! :-)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/22/nyregion/22blind.html?em&ex=1211688000&en=0ca3dcd250c9f51e&ei=5087%0A

[Zhonni]

It looks ridiculous doesn't it? The first time I got one was at a Taco Bell and I got a badly corroded penny to go with it. I thought the girl was trying to pull a fast one on me. It looked like monopoly money--unreal, but I was too embarrased to ask if it were a real currency. I figured I'd try to go spend it right away and if I can't spend it I was going to return for an exchange.

I felt more "had" when I noticed that the bill dated back to 2006."How is it that it has been out so long but I never got one?"

I was pleasantly surprised that it was as good as it's bad look.

[Braveheart1]

I agree, it does look ridiculous. Looks like Pac-Man ghosts above that big a$$ 5!

[jfor]

I will only make this offer one time people anyone embarressed about their money should send it to me immediately and I promise to punish it severely by spending it at Walmart.

[OnePartyEqualsTyranny]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/n/a/2006/01/05/national/a135924S96.DTL&o=0&type=bondage