| Author |
Replies: 40 / Views: 4,735 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
Quote: And bring back 1000's, 5000's, and 10.000 notes, or just make those coins as well, and make them BIGGER THAN HUGE and out of osmium or something more scarce than gold/platinum, with the types of security features Britain and Canada are doing. Let's make a 12" round, that's 6" thick of depleted uranium or iridium, then, while we're at it. :-)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1208 Posts |
By these arguments, we should replace ALL paper money with coins. :rolleyes: I never suggested that paper bills was a "right"... Just that most people like them, and in a nation that is supposed to value freedom and personal choice, the will of a minority ought not be imposed on the public by force.
"The good of the people is the alibi of tyrants"
Also, if the cost of supplying FIAT currency to the nation is a "subsidy", then the cost of coinage is subsidy as well.
Edited by ratio411 01/15/2015 05:50 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1208 Posts |
I'm done arguing. This is not what I come to this hobbyist site for. I just get so sick of seeing these "death to the coin/bill I don't like" threads all over a board that is not, or at least should not, be geared to personal crusades like this. They just come one after the other, and they are generated by the same few people, over and over. Then the comments are all predictable, the same group of people demands force upon the other group of people. It's off topic, divisive, and shouldn't really be allowed... At least not in the specific discussion areas.
I'm out. Going to topics that don't divide, and that actually talk about our hobby.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
189654 Posts |
Quote: ... have the government set the value of the metal to the value of the coin. And just how will we get the rest of the world to go along with this? Quote: Also, if the cost of supplying FIAT currency to the nation is a "subsidy", then the cost of coinage is subsidy as well. First of all, seigniorage. Coins have it, currency does not. Minting coins provides income to the government (except for cents and nickels, which is why we need to get rid of them). Second of all, having the government coin money is in the Constitution. Having them print money is not.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
Quote: in a nation that is supposed to value freedom and personal choice, the will of a minority ought not be imposed on the public by force. For a nation that values freedom and personal choice, we have a huge bloc of folks dedicated to spreading misinformation, and when someone is misinformed they do not have genuine freedom and choice. Folks "like" the dollar bill because they've known nothing else. Poll after poll shows that when you fail to mention the aspect of how wasteful it is, people are *against* the coin 2:1. Consistently. Not mentioning waste is a big glaring omission. The moment you mention it, however, that ratio flips to -- nowadays -- to nearly 3:1 *for* the coin. That would put you among the "will of the minority," ratio411. :-) One additional fact on the table and everything changes. If we look at every other country that has abandoned its smallest-denomination paper notes for coins (and its smallest denomination coins, too, in some cases), there are some people grump for a few years (mostly because it's new) before carrying on as if nothing has happened. Money is saved, and the next generation reaps those benefits and grows up with this "change" as normative. It's a responsible long-term approach -- which we sorely need more of. So, you are free to be "done arguing." I'd prefer it if fewer people argued about this so we could get it implemented already. :-) Quote: First of all, seigniorage. Coins have it, currency does not. Minting coins provides income to the government (except for cents and nickels, which is why we need to get rid of them).
Second of all, having the government coin money is in the Constitution. Having them print money is not. Bingo.
Edited by SteveCaruso 01/15/2015 10:48 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
172 Posts |
You all bring up good points, especially Steve and Jbucks.
If you will allow me and this does not violate the ToS for the site, let me put on my "real life hat" here. I am at a pretty big University and my major focus of research and teaching is the history of the Constitution, including civil/voting rights and monetary policy/history (among other things.... my interests have changed over time).
Jbucks is correct about the Constitution and money, but let me add something. The Constitution gives the federal government the SPECIFIC right (some would even argue RESPONSIBILITY) to "coin" money. The Constitution also specifically BANS states from doing the same, given the chaotic monetary situation and even differing weights and measures situation of the 1780s. This is another reason that Article I gives the feds the unchallenged right to set uniform weights and measures and also to set exchange rates with foreign coin.
However, the Constitution is silent and vague on the role of paper money, and intentionally so. There was much debate in Philadelphia in 1787 about banning federal issues of paper money outright, given the experience with the Continental dollar. However, there were others who, realizing that the United States as then configured had a pretty awful shortage of known gold and silver deposits. Therefore, they wanted the feds to be able to issue paper currency, but wanted the Constitution to remain silent on it. Of course the feds did not issue paper until 1861, and almost all the paper up to that time was issued by banks and other private companies.
To recap: states cannot coin money, nor can banks. The feds can (read by some to mean "must" coin money, and the Constitution is silent on paper. The states, banks, and companies could print paper currency until he feds outlawed this practice in the 1860s.
It's a mess.
Now, on another subject re: the convenience of paper or coins and the physical configuration of the monetary system, money serves three purposes: (1) a unit of account, (2) medium of exchange, and (3) a store of value. #3 is what gets people who denounce "fiat money" all upset mostly #2 is 99% of what comes up on this site regarding dollar coins, for example.
But we as collectors need to realize that #1 and #2 together have to see widely accepted and convenient. If we ignore the intrinsic value/fiat money argument, we need to realize that whatever money we have is widely accepted, recognized, and universally exchangeable. To that end, we could make money out of clamshells or rocks, as long as the government could somehow regulate its supply and prevent counterfeiting.
In the end, dollar coins might well save the feds $$$ in production, but if people do not use or trust them, well.......
I will duck now. Please also realize that even though I study this stuff for a living, all this is just ultimately my opinion.
Kevin.
Edited by KevinH 01/15/2015 11:54 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote: If there was an easy way & inexpensive way to get the coins that do not circulate back into circulation, the mintages would take a nose dive! Problem is there isn't any way. The government had the same proble back during WWII, they didn't have the copper for the cents, but if they could get all the cents in household coin stashes back into circulation they wouldn't have a problem. But even with the high patriotic fervor during the early period in the war they still couldn't get the citizens to circulate their cents. Quote: Hmmm...
We should just say that we are going to do this. During the four years we are not minting the cents they will disappear from circulation and markets will adapt to their absence. By the time year five comes up, there will be no need to resume minting the cents. Now that is an idea I like! Quote: Second of all, having the government coin money is in the Constitution. Having them print money is not. But "coin" is also a verb which means "to create" which means it can be reead as the government is directed "to create" money and regulate the value thereof, and that would include both coins and paper.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2448 Posts |
I can live with either but prefer the $2 bill. I have way too many pocket pieces now anyway. It will get to the point where the only people using coinage will be the poor and numismatists. I rarely use cash anymore and I hate carrying large amounts of coins or currency in todays problem racked society. I believe all coinage and currency will be replaced by electrons within the next twenty years relegating the US Mint and BEP to provide product for collectors. Hope I'm wrong. 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1208 Posts |
Google "inflation tax" (put the quotes on it when you Google)... That is how govt makes money from currency.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
@KevinH - Thank you for your valuable insights. :-)
@ratio411 - You're using "makes money" equivocally there.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
172 Posts |
Yeah. Money is complicated.
I honestly don't think there's ever been a person, organization, or government in the history of civilization than completely understands it.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
189654 Posts |
Nice information, Kevin.  Quote: I honestly don't think there's ever been a person, organization, or government in the history of civilization than completely understands it. I agree. If there were such a being they would have solved all of our problems by now.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1325 Posts |
Quote: I honestly don't think there's ever been a person Money is quite simple just like apples. when you have apples you can eat them, when you have no apples, you no longer have any to eat. That is how simple money is because it is just a number. the problem comes in with credit and loans and other such nonsense where people want to complicate the simplicity of money. Money is just an assigned quantitative value to something that everyone MUST agree on by whoever makes the money. For everything else you have the right to decide you are only willing to give 3 chickens, not 5, for your neighbors cow. Money just assigns a value to each chicken, cow, and apple as variables, and you have little choice but to agree on it (see taxes). Ergo why all US money says "IN GOD WE TRUST" because we sure don't trust the people making the money itself!
Edited by shadz 01/16/2015 6:45 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote: Ergo why all US money says "IN GOD WE TRUST" because we sure don't trust the people making the money itself! Not all US money has In God We Trust on it. I guess they used to be trustworthy.
Edited by Conder101 01/17/2015 06:04 am
|
|
Moderator
 United States
189654 Posts |
Trust no one. 
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 40 / Views: 4,735 |
Page 3 of 3
|