So the other day I pulled out of my wallet a twenty, a ten, two fives and a couple ones. The fives had two different designs, the ten was a different color than the twenty, and the ones looked like they were relics from a bygone age. The question entered my mind, why does our money have to be so ugly?

Look, I’m not complaining about the big purple 5 on the new bill, I’m complaining that there’s no system enveloping the design of our money. It’s just a mishmash of vaguely related-looking concepts. It’s like whatever new idea they had for an individual design was added without regard to what came before or what would come next.

When the Supreme Court got kicked out of the Capitol building in 1935, they didn’t just house them in a couple of chicken coops in the back yard of the White House. No, they designed and built a suitable home for a co-equal part of the government. One that fit with the overall look and feel of other notable facades in Washington and reflected the court’s position relative to the other branches

In contrast, our current lineup of legal tender is a garish collection of individual thoughts that refuse to work in concert. A wad of our currency has all the design integrity of an airport parking lot filled with VWs, SUVs, and station wagons, all painted different colors, all from different manufacturers. Our money is supposed to be a reflection of the full faith and credit of our country. In a way, it’s the most widely distributed and most tangible reflection of our national brand. Shouldn’t it get the same level of thoughtfulness as our great buildings?

We could learn a thing or two from the British.