5 ms·

The euro bank note design is neat. I like the idea of putting bridges on them and it was clever to use made-up bridges instead of real ones, which would have ti

by yreg 3y ago

The euro bank note design is neat. I like the idea of putting bridges on them and it was clever to use made-up bridges instead of real ones, which would have ties to specific countries.

Dalewyn 3y ago
I appreciate why the bridges are (or were, as the case might be) fictional, but it also saddens me because of the implication that appreciating and respecting the people who came before you and exist around you is somehow offensive and wrong. I'm American, so it's definitely not my place to discuss this anymore than in passing commentary, but comparing this to things like our US 50 State commemorative quarters makes me wish the world in general was in a better place.
- kevinmchugh 3y ago
  The euro coins have per state variants. Not sure why that's only true of the coins and can't find an answer atm
  - fhars 3y ago
    Notes and coins are completely different things from a legal standpoint. Only bank notes are unlimited legal tender issued by the central bank. Coins are more of a practical aid for low value cash transaction and are issued by the governments' mints. You can pay a ten billion debt in 5€ notes, but the recipient can refuse your payment if you show up with five billion 2€ coins, which is like two thirds of the total circulation and would require several of the largest freight ships commonly used on European rivers to deliver.
    - lucumo 3y ago
      You're mixing a few things up. Euro coins are also legal tender, but minting and designing them is a national competence. The ECB decides on the volume though, and there are limits to the designs of the coins. Interestingly, member states have to inform the European Commission of the design, but not the ECB. Source: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/coins/html/index.en.html https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/coins/html/index.en.html Legal tender as a concept is also usually not that useful. It's perfectly legal for a shop to refuse certain coins and bills. Dutch shops commonly refuse 1 and 2 cents coins (rounding the amount to 5 cents for cash payments), as well as large denominations out of safety concerns. 100€, 200€ and 500€ are very rare as a consequence. Source (in Dutch): https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/geldzaken/vraag-en-antwoord/kan-ik-met-een-wettig-betaalmiddel-overal-betalen https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/geldzaken/vraag-en-...
  - arlort 3y ago
    If someone tried to fake euro coins they'd likely end up losing money and they're used much less (particularly across borders) than notes. Notes need to be designed much more carefully to avoid counterfeits and if the designs differed people would be more easily tricked by a fake one or would assume that notes from another country are fake by default Coins also don't have transparent elements like notes and aren't supposed to be inspected by using light so it's easier to have a common side and a "do whatever" side
- eCa 3y ago
  The Euro coins, on the other hand, have a country specific side. So with eight denominations and (about) 24 issuing countries there are 192 valid different coins. And then each country can issue two commemorative €2 coins per year.
- inejge 3y ago
  Offensive and wrong? No, but choosing so few people from so many participating nations (and make no mistake, the EU is a lot looser conglomeration, even today, than the US) would be impossible without at least some hurt feelings. So fictional bridges is what you get, for peace and symbolism.
- arlort 3y ago
  You've gotten it a bit twisted. The implication isn't that appreciating the past is offensive The idea was to not exclude any one country, nor to make any one country above the others. There were only 7 banknotes when the euro started but 11 countries. If you put actual landmarks on them you'd have inevitably linked the notes to the country of the landmark, you would've made some countries inevitably feel excluded and politically you'd have created the sense that some countries are literally worth more than others These architectural styles can be found all over the eurozone members (especially the original ones) and making them bridges makes a nice symbol of bridging and bringing countries closer together > 50 State commemorative quarters There's no need for that because each country independently mints the 8 coins (0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.50, 1, 2) and have their own designs on the "tail"
  - Ekaros 3y ago
    Also I'm not sure if all, but many countries make commemorative 2€ coins each year too. But that is not really something to be done with bills, which you don't want to confuse users or machines. Coins have fixed value side and same metal so it is simpler.
  - memefrog 3y ago
    They have different coins. Why couldn't they have different notes? England and Scotland have different notes. I'm sure Germany and France could manage...
    - tialaramex 3y ago
      I can answer this one. Weird money is bad. The coins don't really matter (England for a long time had pre-decimal coins still in circulation, everybody knew what they "meant" so it didn't matter that they were labelled wrong) but large denominations such as bank notes are likely to attract notice and should not be "weird". Almost everywhere, almost always (if you're about to write an objection about "Legal tender", go read what that phrase actually means and reconsider) what matters is whether the person accepting the money agrees this is money. So you want as much as possible for everybody to agree that this 50 Euro note is money, while this toy money from a Monopoly set is not money. Weird money interferes with that. You mention that there are visually distinct Scottish notes. There are. And their face value is exactly identical to English notes, also true. And yet, it is entirely possible that Scottish notes will not be accepted in my city here on England's South coast. Not because of some specific anti-Scottish bigotry but because Scotland is far away and people here have not seen your weird money. Story time. A few years ago I was at my favourite local Chinese restaurant, buying Duck Ho Fun (somewhere the other side of the city does even bigger noodles but it's too far to walk and I'm lazy) and a guy with a strong Scottish accent comes in. He wants something boring, I don't remember what, and he tries to pay with a Scottish note. The restaurant owner does not recognise this as money. Scotsman argues he "has" to take it [this is wrong] but the restaurant owner won't, it is clear that while they're arguing nobody will be actually working on my order, so, I take the Scotsman's weird money and swap it for my English money, which the restaurant owner accepts as good. Weird money is bad.
- tialaramex 3y ago
  It's about symbols and we've learned that over the long haul real things make poor symbols. This is why I believe we should avoid building statues of people and build only statues of ideas. Big statue of some guy in your town? Owned everywhere you can see when he was alive, he built the mill where everybody worked, he founded the school ... and he was a slaver and notorious racist. Not so great. Big statue of Liberty in your city? No problem, the idea of Liberty is all she brings to the conversation (OK in New York's case also a poem "The New Colossus", but the poem was added, the statue doesn't inherently come with a poem).
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    The modern, progressive fetish of anything but The Perfect Man(tm) being unacceptable is a case of No True Scotsman, and I feel that it greatly harms properly understanding and appreciating history. All people are imperfect, whether they are famous or not. If someone achieved something truly remarkable in their life I don't see why we shouldn't appreciate and respect the fact they existed, imperfections included, with symbols such as statues and other imagery. Not to mention that any imperfections an individual has should be seen and considered with the context of their time. It certainly won't excuse their imperfections (nor is that the intent anyway), but doing so furthers understanding history properly so we can strive to be better today. This is all tangential, though, since we're talking about imagery of landmarks and cultures. I find it sad that the EU has to rely on not including anyone/anything to avoid stepping on toes. I understand and appreciate why those toes must not be stepped on at any cost, but that doesn't change my opinion that it's all very sad.
    - tialaramex 3y ago
      Statues aren't history, statues are symbols of aspiration. Liberty and Justice are the most common two ideas we build statues of, but I used to spend a few hours per month at one of London's terminus railway stations, from which coincidentally trains leave for Paris. It has a large metal statue of two humans embracing. "The Lovers" is about why we'd build all this anyway - to bring people together. And there's a big difference between history and aspiration. Poland's holocaust museum at Auschwitz-Birkenau is about history. Find out about what exactly did happen here, the circumstances in which it happened, and the consequences. Its existence isn't - and hasn't been claimed in some "modern, progressive fetish" to be - unacceptable just because nobody should ever do that again, it's kind of the whole point of the site. On the other hand a statue of a Confederate General erected in your town square in 1964, the year MLK Jr won the Nobel Peace Prize, isn't there because of "history" it's there to remind black people that your town is actively proud of enslaving their ancestors and given a chance would do it all again.

by yreg 3y ago

The euro bank note design is neat. I like the idea of putting bridges on them and it was clever to use made-up bridges instead of real ones, which would have ties to specific countries.

Dalewyn 3y ago

I appreciate why the bridges are (or were, as the case might be) fictional, but it also saddens me because of the implication that appreciating and respecting the people who came before you and exist around you is somehow offensive and wrong. I'm American, so it's definitely not my place to discuss this anymore than in passing commentary, but comparing this to things like our US 50 State commemorative quarters makes me wish the world in general was in a better place.

kevinmchugh 3y ago
The euro coins have per state variants. Not sure why that's only true of the coins and can't find an answer atm
- fhars 3y ago
  Notes and coins are completely different things from a legal standpoint. Only bank notes are unlimited legal tender issued by the central bank. Coins are more of a practical aid for low value cash transaction and are issued by the governments' mints. You can pay a ten billion debt in 5€ notes, but the recipient can refuse your payment if you show up with five billion 2€ coins, which is like two thirds of the total circulation and would require several of the largest freight ships commonly used on European rivers to deliver.
  - lucumo 3y ago
    You're mixing a few things up. Euro coins are also legal tender, but minting and designing them is a national competence. The ECB decides on the volume though, and there are limits to the designs of the coins. Interestingly, member states have to inform the European Commission of the design, but not the ECB. Source: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/coins/html/index.en.html https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/coins/html/index.en.html Legal tender as a concept is also usually not that useful. It's perfectly legal for a shop to refuse certain coins and bills. Dutch shops commonly refuse 1 and 2 cents coins (rounding the amount to 5 cents for cash payments), as well as large denominations out of safety concerns. 100€, 200€ and 500€ are very rare as a consequence. Source (in Dutch): https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/geldzaken/vraag-en-antwoord/kan-ik-met-een-wettig-betaalmiddel-overal-betalen https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/geldzaken/vraag-en-...
- arlort 3y ago
  If someone tried to fake euro coins they'd likely end up losing money and they're used much less (particularly across borders) than notes. Notes need to be designed much more carefully to avoid counterfeits and if the designs differed people would be more easily tricked by a fake one or would assume that notes from another country are fake by default Coins also don't have transparent elements like notes and aren't supposed to be inspected by using light so it's easier to have a common side and a "do whatever" side
eCa 3y ago
The Euro coins, on the other hand, have a country specific side. So with eight denominations and (about) 24 issuing countries there are 192 valid different coins. And then each country can issue two commemorative €2 coins per year.
inejge 3y ago
Offensive and wrong? No, but choosing so few people from so many participating nations (and make no mistake, the EU is a lot looser conglomeration, even today, than the US) would be impossible without at least some hurt feelings. So fictional bridges is what you get, for peace and symbolism.
arlort 3y ago
You've gotten it a bit twisted. The implication isn't that appreciating the past is offensive The idea was to not exclude any one country, nor to make any one country above the others. There were only 7 banknotes when the euro started but 11 countries. If you put actual landmarks on them you'd have inevitably linked the notes to the country of the landmark, you would've made some countries inevitably feel excluded and politically you'd have created the sense that some countries are literally worth more than others These architectural styles can be found all over the eurozone members (especially the original ones) and making them bridges makes a nice symbol of bridging and bringing countries closer together > 50 State commemorative quarters There's no need for that because each country independently mints the 8 coins (0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.50, 1, 2) and have their own designs on the "tail"
- Ekaros 3y ago
  Also I'm not sure if all, but many countries make commemorative 2€ coins each year too. But that is not really something to be done with bills, which you don't want to confuse users or machines. Coins have fixed value side and same metal so it is simpler.
- memefrog 3y ago
  They have different coins. Why couldn't they have different notes? England and Scotland have different notes. I'm sure Germany and France could manage...
  - tialaramex 3y ago
    I can answer this one. Weird money is bad. The coins don't really matter (England for a long time had pre-decimal coins still in circulation, everybody knew what they "meant" so it didn't matter that they were labelled wrong) but large denominations such as bank notes are likely to attract notice and should not be "weird". Almost everywhere, almost always (if you're about to write an objection about "Legal tender", go read what that phrase actually means and reconsider) what matters is whether the person accepting the money agrees this is money. So you want as much as possible for everybody to agree that this 50 Euro note is money, while this toy money from a Monopoly set is not money. Weird money interferes with that. You mention that there are visually distinct Scottish notes. There are. And their face value is exactly identical to English notes, also true. And yet, it is entirely possible that Scottish notes will not be accepted in my city here on England's South coast. Not because of some specific anti-Scottish bigotry but because Scotland is far away and people here have not seen your weird money. Story time. A few years ago I was at my favourite local Chinese restaurant, buying Duck Ho Fun (somewhere the other side of the city does even bigger noodles but it's too far to walk and I'm lazy) and a guy with a strong Scottish accent comes in. He wants something boring, I don't remember what, and he tries to pay with a Scottish note. The restaurant owner does not recognise this as money. Scotsman argues he "has" to take it [this is wrong] but the restaurant owner won't, it is clear that while they're arguing nobody will be actually working on my order, so, I take the Scotsman's weird money and swap it for my English money, which the restaurant owner accepts as good. Weird money is bad.
tialaramex 3y ago
It's about symbols and we've learned that over the long haul real things make poor symbols. This is why I believe we should avoid building statues of people and build only statues of ideas. Big statue of some guy in your town? Owned everywhere you can see when he was alive, he built the mill where everybody worked, he founded the school ... and he was a slaver and notorious racist. Not so great. Big statue of Liberty in your city? No problem, the idea of Liberty is all she brings to the conversation (OK in New York's case also a poem "The New Colossus", but the poem was added, the statue doesn't inherently come with a poem).
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  The modern, progressive fetish of anything but The Perfect Man(tm) being unacceptable is a case of No True Scotsman, and I feel that it greatly harms properly understanding and appreciating history. All people are imperfect, whether they are famous or not. If someone achieved something truly remarkable in their life I don't see why we shouldn't appreciate and respect the fact they existed, imperfections included, with symbols such as statues and other imagery. Not to mention that any imperfections an individual has should be seen and considered with the context of their time. It certainly won't excuse their imperfections (nor is that the intent anyway), but doing so furthers understanding history properly so we can strive to be better today. This is all tangential, though, since we're talking about imagery of landmarks and cultures. I find it sad that the EU has to rely on not including anyone/anything to avoid stepping on toes. I understand and appreciate why those toes must not be stepped on at any cost, but that doesn't change my opinion that it's all very sad.
  - tialaramex 3y ago
    Statues aren't history, statues are symbols of aspiration. Liberty and Justice are the most common two ideas we build statues of, but I used to spend a few hours per month at one of London's terminus railway stations, from which coincidentally trains leave for Paris. It has a large metal statue of two humans embracing. "The Lovers" is about why we'd build all this anyway - to bring people together. And there's a big difference between history and aspiration. Poland's holocaust museum at Auschwitz-Birkenau is about history. Find out about what exactly did happen here, the circumstances in which it happened, and the consequences. Its existence isn't - and hasn't been claimed in some "modern, progressive fetish" to be - unacceptable just because nobody should ever do that again, it's kind of the whole point of the site. On the other hand a statue of a Confederate General erected in your town square in 1964, the year MLK Jr won the Nobel Peace Prize, isn't there because of "history" it's there to remind black people that your town is actively proud of enslaving their ancestors and given a chance would do it all again.