Eliminate the $100 bill?

[Alan Mendelson]

Now, there is discussion about eliminating the $100 bill. Why eliminate the $100 bill? To cut down on crime, money-laundering, tax evasion, terrorist activities, and so forth. But $100s are the primary bill in use in casinos. See my article here:
http://alanbestbuys.com/id239.html

What do you think?

[RS__]

They should (re)introduce the $500 bills. At least definitely DO NOT REMOVE the $100 bills. If they ever do that, I'mma need a lot more pockets.

[Rob.Singer]

It all comes from the politicians and few of them use cash. The $500 bill re-introduction would be nice but a $1000 note would be better--and not just because of casinos. And casinos could operate w/o cash anyway.

[Alan Mendelson]

What would be the purpose of a thousand dollar bill? Really.

[Rob.Singer]

For those who don't wish to leave a paper trail on their purchases. And I can't tell you how many times, especially when I had to wait in high limit room lines to exchange hundies for 5-figure tickets, that I had $1000 bills instead of $100's.

[Count Room]

What would be the purpose of a thousand dollar bill? Really.

Alan: I can't directly answer your question, but my opinion is that we'd be making a big mistake eliminating $100 bills. Actually, the term "idiotic" springs to mind as more appropriate.

Not everyone likes Bitcoin, and having the government able to electronically track every purchase we make smacks of Big Brother to me.

Here's an interesting question: What was the crime rate in the US in the 1960's before the $1,000 bill was discontinued in 1969? A $1,000 bill back then is probably equivalent to $6,000 or so today. Was crime more rampant with such concentrated stores of value back then compared to today? Crime reduction seems like a hollow excuse here.

The reduction of crime seems like a vanishingly small benefit compared to the loss of privacy for US citizens as a whole.

Side story: I've seen lots of $500 and up FRN's and gold certificates at coin shows and museums (including ANA's incredible display of two $100,000 bills with Woodrow Wilson).

My grandfather told me stories during my childhood of his owning a few $1,000 bills in general circulation as well.

[jbjb]

The phony "war on drugs" is the entire region for nonsense like this.

[Alan Mendelson]

What would be the purpose of a thousand dollar bill? Really.

For those who don't wish to leave a paper trail on their purchases.

What are you going to buy for a thousand dollars or more that doesn't have a paper trail by the seller? There's going to be a paper trail at the car dealer, at the appliance store, at the electronics store, at the hotel, at the resort, at the cruise line, at the airline, at the hospital, at the jewelry store. Just exactly what business is going to sell you something for $1,000 and up and isn't going to have a record of it?

Oops... I know. Someone who is doing something illegal. Maybe it's someone working off the books, or someone selling you something that he shouldn't be selling.

[dannyj]

Now, there is discussion about eliminating the $100 bill. Why eliminate the $100 bill? To cut down on crime, money-laundering, tax evasion, terrorist activities, and so forth. But $100s are the primary bill in use in casinos. See my article here:
http://alanbestbuys.com/id239.html

What do you think?

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it's all about control and traceability. Former treasury secretary Larry Summers recently wrote a piece entitled, " It's time to kill the $100 bill, It's time to go after big money"

I seriously doubt they would ever consider reissuing larger than $100 notes. The 500 euro note may soon become a thing of the past though.
And, while I still have my tin foil hat on, we have moved and will continue to move towards a cashless society. Big brother wants to know what you're doing.

[Count Room]

I'd go so far as to say we should do the opposite that Lawrence Summers suggests and we should re-introduce the $500 and $1,000 bills. No one says we must carry these large bills around; it is only an option and you would still be totally free to decline to do so and to use credit/debit cards, instead, if you feel unsafe about it.

I'd rather have international criminals sloshing around a few billion worldwide than to have the government eventually eliminate all paper money and able to willfully track every gallon of milk and fruit juice I purchase.

[Alan Mendelson]

I'd rather have international criminals sloshing around a few billion worldwide than to have the government eventually eliminate all paper money and able to willfully track every gallon of milk and fruit juice I purchase.

Really? You'd really want to protect the criminals more than your privacy about buying milk and fruit juice?

[Rob.Singer]

Ha! See if you can get Spock on this. He'll change quotes around then dress them up with words that'll make even him believe in it.

[dannyj]

Really? You'd really want to protect the criminals more than your privacy about buying milk and fruit juice?

I don't think that's what Count is saying. I think he means that if the trade off was a cashless society where everyone made traceable purchases with a card versus having international criminals traveling around (and taking the risk) with potentially hundreds of millions or more of large denomination notes, he would choose the latter.

I agree.

[jbjb]

Whether you want to believe it or not, these phony wars, (drugs, terror, etc.) are nothing but government plots to take away your rights and privacy. And that is the undeniable truth!

[Rob.Singer]

It could be interpreted like that---to the paranoid. But I agree there is something curiously different going on within the US Gov't. today vs. 40 years ago

[Alan Mendelson]

If eliminating currency will stop the terrorists including ISIS and stop the drug cartels and human trafficking and border smugglers then take away our folding money and I will happily use plastic for everything.

[RoeIncarnate]

Historical crime graph: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crim...ted_States.svg


Also if you eliminate the $100 bill you make it basically impossible to move LARGE amounts of money. The sheer volume and weight of 20 would prove impossible for drugs and money laundering.


Eliminating all cash would be worrisome, but I charge everything to a credit card so wouldn't really affect me.

[Count Room]

Roe: That graph shows similar crime rates today compared to the 1960's when super large bills ($500 and up) were still being made. The raw numbers might be slightly higher today, but the US also has a significantly larger population, as well.

Anyway, I said my piece already and I think it would be crazy to remove $100's (and don't forget the corrosive power of inflation on that poor little $100 bill over the past 50 years, too!).

If people want to use plastic all the time, those of us who use cash at least sometimes are not objecting to plastic users' freedom to do so. So, why should the plastic users be permitted to impose their will upon those of us who like to freely use cash?

[Count Room]

I don't think that's what Count is saying. I think he means that if the trade off was a cashless society where everyone made traceable purchases with a card versus having international criminals traveling around (and taking the risk) with potentially hundreds of millions or more of large denomination notes, he would choose the latter.

dannyj: You explained my viewpoint to Alan much more clearly than I did. Thank you!

[Alan Mendelson]

So, why should the plastic users be permitted to impose their will upon those of us who like to freely use cash?

I have no objection to the use of cash. But who would need more than a couple of hundred dollars in cash for any legitimate, purchase that doesn't need tracing for either tax or enforcement or regulation purposes?

Please go ahead and use a $50 bill at the supermarket. Use three of them if you need them. But why would you need $100,000 or more in $100 bills?