US Coin Vs Dollar - I Asked The Canadians

Franklin, - thanks for this - I was trying to fight off a migraine (real - not a buzzword) and knew there was a problem. Its just too easy to make errors when I am like that.

Sorry, but right back at you!

If you read my posts, you will see where I said I believe the coins are, most likely, cost effective.

In other threads kill-the-bill people were going to an extreme in nay-saying the arguments others from the no-coin-only viewpoint were posting. Like I said, some were even making hypothetical situations "proving" any stated opposition (read excuses by the naysayers) was a fairy tale. This always throws up a flag in my mind that more than fact is being used in the reasoning process (read ... possible, though usually unnoticed emotional motivations).

This thread - which I initiated - was to show what really happens/happened. And the inquiry was worded so as to allow the truth to surface about the validity of the complaints - despite any personal viewpoint. As a result, the complaints are not longer classified as "excuses" but are QED'd as valid.

What does this mean? It means that, although probably correct on the initial savings issue, some kill-the-bill people now can see that an actual, countrywide experience, supports what some were saying (adamantly sometimes) was nonsense.




Maybe I am not understanding, but this seems you say it is illogical to ask for information (collect data) from experienced people/countries? After all, the suggested videos by the people who went through it were national broadcasts showing the overall opinions. It was not just asking 2 or three people. The very title of the article shows the reporter knew the general Canadian viewpoint ... he knew they would not be scratching their heads over "reinforce pockets ... again."

People with personal experience were asked to contribute so people without personal experience could understand the reality of the situation -- instead of assuming actual ramifications.

Ignoring their collective experience and calling it anecdotal (definition - regarded as unreliable or hearsay) goes against the well established saying that those who refuse to study history are doomed to repeat it.

... illogical?




Actually, again, I have been trying to get people to open their minds and see if there even is another solution other than kill-bills. The first time I mentioned polymers in another thread, some ad hominem posts resulted while others dodged the issue altogether and were not even willing to say they could be an option if someone would look into it.

Now you and some others have said there might be another option. This was definitely NOT how the suggestion that a solution might be found to please the majority and save money was first responded to - by any means.

You hit the nail on the head that time!

The only thing I have to add is, I don't think it is even possible to do a realistic study on it, by countries like Canada, Australia, etc. that have gone through the switch already.

Maybe looking at their annual budgets to see how they have changed or improved? The US Mint posts one, but I don't think other countries post theirs to the public. Anyone want to search their web sites for their annual budget reports?

Ever heard of "preaching to the choir?"

The cost effectiveness was already duscussed in other threads and agreed upon!

This thread was started b/c of a suggestion by jbuck in another thread on a related issue:
https://goccf.com/t/110925&whichpage=5

jbuck said:



So, again, is it the sacred cow syndrome pulling this back to something already agreed upon?

Don't just argue to kill the bill - kill the cow as well

I think the reason why our Wise Canadian members are not bothering to join in the discussion is that they have already made the necessary changes ( along with us Aussies ) and they can't see what all the hoo ha is all about.
It has been a success in Canada and Aus so why NOT just sit back and watch ( and have a bit of a giggle)

Originally I did put the initial request in the Canadian forum to ask their opinions. I only put this here b/c I did not know how many people would see it if in the Canadian forum.

Like jbuck said, the Canadians probably do not peruse our forum much, so I figured we do not peruse theirs as much either. So that's why it is here.





They also might just see it as our turn. They went through it and had the same complaints (I do not know the initial responses when Oz switched over). And, at least I know in Canada, it has been long enough ago the people seeing the different threads about this probably are having a good laugh since they were not a part of the switch. Time heals all wounds.

How about "encouraging" ppl to use the coins. Sell $100 face for $95, no bank allows more than five in a deposit. This would encourage ppl to get them, and use the because they have no option.

That second part is key. It should prevent the abuse of the original direct ship program.

And then there is the rub.

A good compromise would allow commercial (retail business) accounts to deposit without limit. A limit on personal and non-retail accounts would still prevent the direct ship abuse that occurred before.

Regardless, the ideal solution (for getting them to circulate) is to kill the note.