• WhiteRabbit_33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s more a legally gray area in the US that as far as I can find from a quick search has never been settled in court. It likely isn’t worth the time for police to go after either even if it was more explicitly illegal.

      That might change if there’s a sudden surge in people drawing on $100 bills, but who uses $100s that often anyway? Most ATMs I used only dispense $20s. It often isn’t worth the trip to the bank, and the US is unfortunately mostly cashless now.

      But to be clear: fuck this fascist bullshit and resist in whatever ways you can

      https://www.stampstampede.org/faq/yes-its-legal/

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        There’s an argument we shouldn’t even be issuing $100 bills in the first place. Counterfeiters have to spend money to copy money. A $1 or $5 bill isn’t worth the cost. A $50 is getting there, but if you put extra anti-counterfeiting measures around it, then it’s pushed out of reach again.

        Once you reach a $100 bill, though, it’s hard to have enough anti-counterfeiting measures while also being cheap enough to produce by the actual US Mint. Drop it entirely, and the problem goes away.

        • deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sorry, I’m gonna be that person… The US Mint makes coins, not the paper money. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing is responsible for printing, among other things, the paper money.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          There was a very good reason for it back when physical money was more necessary. Now, there’s essentially no purpose except crime. Almost all purchases are payed cashless. If you really want to use cash, almost no transactions are prohibitive just using $20s or $50s. Maybe buying a car or house would be tough, and I’m sure someone does that with cash, but that’d just be the cost of choosing to use cash.

          • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Considering that DOGE can likely withdraw money from bank accounts at will, relying on cash seems very legitimate. I don’t want my life savings to just vanish because Musk felt like it. Or worse, replaced it with Muskcoin in a offer that no one can refuse.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s not illegal as long as you’re not trying to get it out of circulation, advertise, or pass off one denomination as another. So deface away.

      (note: I am not a lawyer, do not believe some random person on the internet)

    • Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also illegal for a living person to be featured in our currency.

      “ThE rUlEs SaY a DoG cAnT pLaY bAsKeTbAlL!1!!”

      18th consecutive golden retriever dunk

    • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sidenote: I spent a couple of years working in Nigeria. Almost all bank notes there had some scribble on it, as it frequently doubled as note paper. When you don’t have Post-its, cash will do, I guess.