> If we're redoing currency, why not get Grant's sorry ass off the $50? Reagan would be vastly superior to Grant, who may have helped us win the Civil War but was a terrible president.


I don't care how terrible a president he was. I think winning the Civil War ought to carry an awful lot of weight.


>Also, considering he wrote the Declaration of Independence, we should put Jefferson on a good bill (who uses $2 bills?). Let's also get Madison on one, for helping get the Constitution written. Yeah, I know their presidencies were fairly unremarkable, but we've got Franklin and Hamilton on notes now and neither were even president, and their accomplishments certainly are outshined by Madison and Jefferson, though with Franklin it's a close call.


Well, Jefferson's also got the nickel. And hey, if we're not going to consider their presidencies and instead use their outside accomplishments, then we'd better do the same for Grant!

Hamilton certainly deserves his currency, what with keeping the Treasury's head above water after the war, and things like being instrumental in creating the Coast Guard and the Navy. I think Franklin is a huge symbol in American culture, which is also sort of the point of putting people on currency. I would, though, love to find a spot for Madison somewhere. Maybe we can make another dollar coin for him!!1


> My suggestions: ditch Grant for Jefferson or Madison, and move Hamilton off the $10 and onto the $2, replacing him with Jefferson/Madison. If we wanted to get rid of Hamilton altogether, I wouldn't be too pissed, though before we added Reagan I'd suggest adding FDR, for saving the world back in the 1940s.


Oh, you said it here, too. FDR's got the dime. Better than the nothing that Madison's got.


> We can get Reagan on money by ditching JFK from the fifty cent piece and putting him on one of those.


I don't mind JFK on the 50 cent piece, in large part because of his cultural/symbolic significance (a la Franklin), and because he was one heck of a Cold Warrior.


TOM