Talk:United States dollar

Dollar coins and armored car companies

I removed the statement that the armored carriers were obstructing the distribution of dollar coins (I had added this a couple of years ago. I've read that Brinks is on board with the Coin Coalition, though I can't find a cite now. A cite would be nice, but I don't think it's absolutely essential in removing my own statement if I believe that had been erroneous.Pithecanthropus (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Removed second occurrence in the article, and found cite on Brinks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pithecanthropus (talk • contribs) 01:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

When UNDUE approaches OT

The lede isn’t the only correction needed. The philosophical hair-splitting about what is and isn’t a dollar, about perceived differences between coins and FRN, and which parts of our currency derive from which Constitutional phrase, are all weighing this article down.

• These distinctions are original research, not confirmed by secondary sources
• Caselaw (as cited above) makes clear that such distinctions do not reflect mainstream legal thinking
• The distinctions being suggested constitute a difference which makes no difference. Whether coin or note or numbers on a balance sheet, the dollar is still currency.
• These contentions are presented here as though they were established and accepted, when clearly they are not.

Perhaps a namespace should be created to discuss Theories of American Currency (or something more appropriate), but not here please. What is the consensus here? Uberhill 03:51, 28 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uberhill (talk • contribs)

Why is Ecuador both an Official and Unofficial user of the US Dollar? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.10.193.23 (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC) perhaps there is a bit of nit picking going on, theory would be relegated to Money, Credit and Banking, the subtle differences, dollar, USD, Trade Dollar, Legal Tender, reserve - non reserve are important to numistmatists, theoreticians, bean counters and children, the distinctions ARE critical to many in many different ways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BobV01 (talk) 15:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

When STUPID approaches ITY... By your rationale, it would be prudent to eliminate outdated documents like the Constitution and replace them with our good faith in the intentions and agendas of our wonderful oligarchy. The soaring prices of commodities worldwide seem to indicate a general distrust in fiat currency and a desire to return to real money, and yes, an American dollar is 371.25 grains of silver. Have a nice day =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.208.158.145 (talk) 12:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 exchange rate

The 2010 exchange rate should be added in the Exchange Rate History Table. It is at an ultimate low as of recently, with the euro at 1,41 to the dollar...http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/14/markets/thebuzz/index.htm Vonabisz (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Is this dispute still current?

If an article, especially on such a very basic concept such as the US Dollar, is going to be defaced and marginalized with dispute and POV banners all over it, the reader should be able to find at least a summary of the dispute(s) on the talk pages, where the banners direct them, so they can arrive at their own conclusion of whether the dispute(s) is valid or not without being forced to search through various archives. That is assuming the reader even knows how to search an archive or even that it may exist.

This isn't an article about the "Troubles", it is about a unit of currency. How can a dispute about something so basic be so intractable that POV tags since April 2010 are still plastered all over it and nothing is on the talk pages?

If the dispute is no longer current then the banners need to be removed. Veriss (talk) 15:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

"B" Classification needs to be reassessed

If, in fact, all of these tags from 2008, 2009 and April 2010 are valid, this article may not meet the standards for its current "B" rating.

• Entire article is tagged as "needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications", Apr 2010.
• Five basic sections such as Overview, History, Banknotes, Means of Issue, and Value are tagged as "disputed" since Apr 2010.
• Three basic sections such as Nicknames (Apr 2008), Silver and gold standards(Apr 2010), Means of Issue (Jul 2009) are cited as "unreferenced".
• One basic section, Means of Issue, is tagged for "factual accuracy" since Apr 2010.
• One basic section, Silver and gold standards, has been tagged as "outdated" since Apr 2009.
• One basic section, Dollar coins, is tagged as "may stray from the topic of the article" since Apr 2010

April seemed to have been a rough month for this article. I was surprised as I would expect the disputes to be in the international sections, not in such basic sections. This article is also listed as a "Vital Article" (WP:VA).

It may need to be reassessed by an uninvolved party. Veriss (talk) 15:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's deal with the problems, then. If in all that time nobody has offered fixes for the "Means of Issue" section, I propose deleting it. Thoughts? Uberhill 16:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uberhill (talk • contribs)

I was expecting some background on these issues but no one is stepping up to fill us in. Veriss (talk) 22:33, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Other forms of US dollar

I believe that besides coins and Federal Reserve Notes, there are US dollars in the form of deposits at the Federal Reserve. The Fed can create US dollars simply by changing its balance sheet, and notes are only printed as requested by institutions. However I think the notes still make up the bulk of the US dollar base (unless this has changed with the massive increase of the balance sheet in the last few years). Horatio (talk) 22:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Banks also create dollars when they do fractional banking, people temporarily create dollars when they write checks, etc. -- Beland (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, if you count all bank deposits as dollars. But not if you are using a strict currency definition, i.e., the dollars on the Federal Reserve's balance sheet, whether or not actually printed. Horatio (talk) 21:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Photos

I've removed a photo of a stack of prop money. I don't think a picture of fake bills is especially helpful on this page. If anyone has a similar photo of real currency, please add it. Compuandy (talk) 22:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Use outside US: Aruba

We need a citation that the US dollar is accepted/used as a second currency in Aruba. Gugganij (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

agreed. I am wondering a bit though what criterion is used for inclusion in this list? Being a widely used secondary currency? A ref on Aruba is here, while an even more convincing report on use is on Sint Maarten. Shall I add both? L.tak (talk) 22:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Ecuador official or unofficial

Ecuador is listed both as official user of the USD and unofficial user of the USD, that seems a bit silly, can someone check which is true and delete the other, I could not find any information on the subject. --Utkun (talk) 17:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Where does it inidacate they're an unofficial user of the USD?

In the info box in the upper right hand corner. You need to click the 'show' button to see it. A number of sources, including the US government, indicate the USD is the official currency of Ecuador. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35761.htm Rob Page III (talk) 01:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Value against the Euro

How is there any information for that from before 1999?96.242.81.80 (talk) 23:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Inflation rate

Might I suggest we stop using the latest monthly inflation rate for this page and start using the latest annual inflation rate instead, like all of the other currency pages? The annual inflation rate is more encyclopædic and informative. --- W5WMW (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I was "bold" and went ahead and changed it since there were no objections for many months. It was immediately reverted by an IP user. So, let's get a consensus, or even just one other opinion at least. --W5WMW (talk) 02:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I agree with you. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 02:22, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyone else? I'll wait a bit longer before fixing it, again.--W5WMW (talk) 04:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Article selected as United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month for July 2011

United States dollar (3 votes, stays until June 1, 2011)

Nominated 22:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC); needs 3 votes by June 1, 2011 (minimum 3 votes per month)

Support:

1. Kumioko (talk) 22:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
2. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
3. JayJasper (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
4. Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments:

• One of the main forms of currency used in the United States. It has a lot fo content but it needs a lot of work in a lot of areas Kumioko (talk) 22:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
• I like the idea of this one, maybe Wehwalt (talk · contribs) can chip in. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
• An article on an important subject that is need of cleanup, copyediting, and improved sourcing.--JayJasper (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Eagle

The Overview section, paragpah 4 starts:

"The U.S. dollar bill uses the decimal system, consisting of 100 equal cents (symbol ¢). It is also officially divided into 1,000 mills or ten dimes, while ten dollars is equal to an eagle."

31 USC § 5101. Decimal system provides "United States money is expressed in dollars, dimes or tenths, cents or hundreths, and mills or thousandths. A dime is a tenth of a dollar, a cent is a hundredth of a dollar, and a mill is a thousandth of a dollar."

So what current law says $10=1Eagle? And was the historic eagle a denomination or just a nickname like the modern Nickle?

I would change this to:

"The U.S. dollar is commonly divided into 100 cents, symbolized ¢. It is also officially divided into ten dimes, and technicaly 1,000 mills, however the mill is encountered only in a few industries and is no longer represented by either coin or note."

And preserve the link to mill and add one to dime.

What do you think? Awg1010 (talk) 21:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Entirely reasonable. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 22:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Frequently and rarely used?

50¢ & $1 coins and $2 notes are claimed to be rarely used. However, one guy visited the US and before the trip he exchanged currency, and he got $2 to $50 notes, and there were quite many $2 bills. Secondly, he brought me some coins, and there were three (!) different $1 coins with him. So, actually how are these rare? The 50 cent, though, seems actually be rare.
But, there is no citation in the article, so isn't it original research after all? 82.141.94.35 (talk) 19:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I used to goto a bank here in Boston and buy $2 bills. But I had to ask for them in my own personal experiences. CaribDigita (talk) 21:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I used to work as a cashier at a truck stop and we almost never got dollar coins or two dollar bills. Fifty cent coins were seen even less, like almost down to once a year. 174.108.55.12 (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Picture

The rarely seen coin is huge, the often seen bills are small. Unless this is a standard somewhere, perhaps the main photo should be more representative of what people actually think when they hear "US Dollar." 207.159.187.115 (talk) 23:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Citation Needed: The United States dollar is the official currency of the United States of America

I am not so certain of this statement. Yes it is easy for anyone to recognize a paper product filling role of currency with 'united states of america' text caption printed on it and other imagery and symbolism to be understood as official, but is it really? I would like to learn more about the validity and accuracy of this claim other than one that is forced with things like "well, that's the way it was since I've been born" type of response. And for me (and others) to have clear and defining resource to rely upon for such factual evidences, a source will be most useful. [Two] [times] reference to 'citation needed' for this specific sentence have been reverted. Why? I see in this article alone seven other instances of 'citation needed.' Why haven't those also been removed? Is there seriously a concerted effort by one or more individuals to prevent the disclosure of citation of this statement to be more factually evidenced or otherwise verified/confirmed other than passing off as yet another forced ideaology? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mizerydearia (talk) 06:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

http://www.blacklistednews.com/10_Things_That_Every_American_Should_Know_About_The_Federal_Reserve_/17853/0/0/0/Y/M.html Mizerydearia (talk) 12:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)