New $10 Bill in 2020
They could replace Alexander Hamilton with Margaret Hamilton.
We know she looks good in green already.
Here's my verbose opinion. Sorry mrincredible for stealing your thread.
So, commemorating a woman in this way is definitely a good thing, but the campaign had previously suggested replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20, and with good reason. The $20 is circulated at much higher frequency and is worth, well, two tenners.
The Treasury said, in a bizarre self-effacing move, "Sure! But let's drop Hamilton, our first Secretary, instead." So poor Alexander Hamilton, once slain in a duel, is now slain in another duel with a man who did slay people in duels: "bloody bloody" Andrew Jackson.
I'm going to be facetious and suggest that Hamilton, a Federalist and a non-president, is to be beheaded because of our whiggish (not to be confused with Whig, which was rarely great) emphasis on "great men," which in turn feeds our simplistic obsession with the presidency in history. The same attitude toward commemoration gives each president a library, and tries to overpopulate Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol with dead presidents, even though it's the house of the legislative branch, not the executive.
Jackson may be easier to relate to than Hamilton because the Treasury just seems more complicated and vague than elections and parties. He was also a more obvious war hero, and we love those. Furthermore, Jackson bafflingly remains a vague hero of the Democratic Party in spite of himself, because he was, well, kind of democratic, I guess?
SouthernBaron said:
Here's my verbose opinion. Sorry mrincredible for stealing your thread.
So, commemorating a woman in this way is definitely a good thing, but the campaign had previously suggested replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20, and with good reason. The $20 is circulated at much higher frequency and is worth, well, two tenners.
The Treasury said, in a bizarre self-effacing move, "Sure! But let's drop Hamilton, our first Secretary, instead." So poor Alexander Hamilton, once slain in a duel, is now slain in another duel with a man who did slay people in duels: "bloody bloody" Andrew Jackson.
I'm going to be facetious and suggest that Hamilton, a Federalist and a non-president, is to be beheaded because of our whiggish (not to be confused with Whig, which was rarely great) emphasis on "great men," which in turn feeds our simplistic obsession with the presidency in history. The same attitude toward commemoration gives each president a library, and tries to overpopulate Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol with dead presidents, even though it's the house of the legislative branch, not the executive.
Jackson may be easier to relate to than Hamilton because the Treasury just seems more complicated and vague than elections and parties. He was also a more obvious war hero, and we love those. Furthermore, Jackson bafflingly remains a vague hero of the Democratic Party in spite of himself, because he was, well, kind of democratic, I guess?
All interesting points. Thread piracy aside.
I wasn't thinking about the frequency of circulation, but of course nearly every ATM in the country spits out Andrew Jacksons. I wonder if the Treasury chickened out a little on putting a woman on such a widely circulated bill.
And Jack Lew, the current US Secretary of the Treasury, is a native New Yorker! Alexander Hamilton, although born elsewhere, is closely associated with new York.
If they put a woman on the $10, does it then become worth only $8? Kidding.
I'm a fan of Hamilton's, as I'm reading his biography now. He singlehandedly designed the American economy.
Wasn't Jackson opposed to reconstruction? He doesn't sound like a hero to me.
We don't need $10 bills anyway. We need bills in powers of four or five. That is, each bill should be worth four or five times the value of the lower one. Same for coins, but there should be a small gap between the biggest coin and the smallest bill.
They need to delay a bit
Hillary will just be finishing her first term. They need to wait until she finishes her second term and then put her on the 20.
Tom_Reingold said:
If they put a woman on the $10, does it then become worth only $8? Kidding.
I'm a fan of Hamilton's, as I'm reading his biography now. He singlehandedly designed the American economy.
Wasn't Jackson opposed to reconstruction? He doesn't sound like a hero to me.
We don't need $10 bills anyway. We need bills in powers of four or five. That is, each bill should be worth four or five times the value of the lower one. Same for coins, but there should be a small gap between the biggest coin and the smallest bill.
I think you're confusing him with Johnson. Jackson is the prez who put the pop in populism, while deporting Native Americans. He did save my hometown from the Brits in January 1815, though, so I give him a nod of appreciation.
Wasn't the war actually over by the time he saved New Orleans, though? My understanding was that thanks to slow communications, the battle actually took place after the war was concluded, meaning that was actually a pointless battle.
I also vaguely remember from reading What hath God Wrought that he executed POWs during some of his earlier military campaigns, but I'd have to go back and check on that.
Ah, here we go:
"Jackson captured Pensacola, Florida, with little more than some warning shots, and deposed the Spanish governor. He captured and then tried and executed two British subjects, Robert Ambrister and Alexander Arbuthnot, who had been supplying and advising the Indians."
From Wikipedia. That's the incident I was thinking of. Plus of course, "deporting" Native Americans is a pretty genteel way of phrasing it....
PVW said:
Wasn't the war actually over by the time he saved New Orleans, though? My understanding was that thanks to slow communications, the battle actually took place after the war was concluded, meaning that was actually a pointless battle.
This is the old refrain, but all it really means is that the Atlantic Ocean is big. Technically, yes, the war was "over." However, nobody in New Orleans knew that, so if we hadn't won, then the British would probably have invaded and occupied the city. Even if it were just for a little while, it wouldn't have been very nice.
Oh, and I do try to be more "genteel" than Jackson generally was.
Yeah, the "genteel" commented was directed more toward Jackson's action than to your choice of words. Though I do sometimes wonder if we do a disservice when we try to discuss history politely -- would Jackson sit so easily on the $20 if we were more forthright about him? He was a bully and a killer, and I think in many ways an exemplar of our darker impulses as a nation. This thread has been fairly light in tone, so I don't want to derail it too badly, but if I'm being a bit more honest for a moment, Jackson really is an awful person to be honoring on our currency.
PVW, I agree, and as far as the money goes, well, Hamilton was robbed. (groan!) I generally question, but don't always oppose, our attempts to rewrite our history through commemorations, especially concerning things like statues in public squares; it's better to recognize our past, and understand how our views of it evolve every year and won't stop in the future either. But money is one form that changes easily (somebody stop me!) and has throughout its history.
Well now that we've settled that -- can we all agree that the penny needs to die?
;-)
The first woman ever elected to Congress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jeannette_Rankin
I've been following this proposed change for a while, and I agree with those who feel keep Hamilton on the $10 and remove Jackson from the $20 - Hamilton was an important figure during the Revolution - not only as a revolutionary fighter, but as an architect of our government. And he isn't connected with slavery or the forced relocation of Native Americans, either.
As for who should replace Jackson, I'd probably say Harriet Tubman, but there are a number of important woman who have earned their place on the bill.
ctrzaska said:
I'm going with Whistler's mother.
Arrangement in Gray and Black becomes Arrangement in Green and White.
cody said:
I've been following this proposed change for a while, and I agree with those who feel keep Hamilton on the $10 and remove Jackson from the $20 - Hamilton was an important figure during the Revolution - not only as a revolutionary fighter, but as an architect of our government. And he isn't connected with slavery or the forced relocation of Native Americans, either.
As for who should replace Jackson, I'd probably say Harriet Tubman, but there are a number of important woman who have earned their place on the bill.
All this, exactly.
Abigail Adams? She had some serious influence on early US politics, even if it was through her husband.
FilmCarp said:
Abigail Adams? She had some serious influence on early US politics, even if it was through her husband.
YES! I would replace Jackson with Hamilton on the $20, and put Abigail Adams on the $10. I am sure that John would heartily approve...
bluepool said:
FilmCarp said:YES! I would replace Jackson with Hamilton on the $20, and put Abigail Adams on the $10. I am sure that John would heartily approve...
Abigail Adams? She had some serious influence on early US politics, even if it was through her husband.
Why not just put the woman on the $20 and avoid spending the money to retool both lines?
sac said:
bluepool said:Why not just put the woman on the $20 and avoid spending the money to retool both lines?
FilmCarp said:YES! I would replace Jackson with Hamilton on the $20, and put Abigail Adams on the $10. I am sure that John would heartily approve...
Abigail Adams? She had some serious influence on early US politics, even if it was through her husband.
Agreed.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
So the $10 bill will be redesigned for 2020. The Treasury department is looking for a woman to depict on the note (sorry Al). Any thoughts? The honoree can't be alive.
I think maybe Grace Hopper. Or Amelia Earhart.