| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 4,137 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
54280 Posts |
Politics:
Zinc, copper, nickel lobbyists make sure coins do not get eliminated.
Vending machine lobbyists make sure coins do not change in size or weight.
Coinstar depends on coins.
People that work in mines, refining, metals manufacturing, and even the mints would be put out of work.
Some say politicians don't care about what is best for for the country, so they don't eliminate the cent or nickel.
Some say politicians DO care about what is best for for the country, so they don't eliminate the cent or nickel.
Is it better to save the money it takes to make cents or nickels, or is it better to keep mines open and miners and others employed?
Would the disaffected workers find other work, or go on some other type of government assistance, resulting in no cost savings to the government.
Hmmm, what did Canada do? What did Mexico do? What did Australia do? What did Brazil do? What did Denmark do? What did a dozen or more other countries do? They eliminated the small denomination coin(s).
What does the EuroZone want to do? Eliminate the 1 and 2 cent coins.
Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4211 Posts |
I have been a proof set / mint set / uncirculated set customer for a very long time. I remember thinking when I bought my first "28 coin" uncirculated set thinking this is WAY too many coins to have to purchase. Then 36 coins in the 2009 uncirculated set. Wow. I am looking forward to the end of the Presidential dollars after this last set this year. Back on the subject. I for one would be fine eliminating the cent and using a coin for $1. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
My thought are a bit different. I think the Mint should start making more coins of all denominations. In other words, keep the 1 Cent, add a 2 Cent, 3 Cent, 4 Cent and all the way up to 1 Dollar coins. All graduated in size from the smallest to the largest size based on the size of denomination. All made of the same material such as Nickel. And as to what should be put on them. Why all the presidents starting with the first one and continuing up from there. Not enough Presidents though so some of these coins would have to have the Presidents pets on some of them. For the reverse, the Presidents horse or car.
OR leave well enough alone.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5172 Posts |
I personally do not understand the problem with small denominations. At all. A dime - never mind a quarter - is an awful lot of money. There's all sort of cheap items that actually cost below a quarter. (Due to sheer inflation, perhaps now there really isn't anything that costs below a cent; a decade or two ago there probably was. "Dime a dozen" might well be literal for some items even today.) Make your nickels, and cents. And Half Cents, and quarter cents, and mills and half mills if you like. My country's lowest denomination is worth less than a half mill (0.05 cents) in exchange rate; it hadn't been worth more than a half mill since 1999, and it's been continuosly produced for circulation for ten of those years. (Then again in 2014 as it was urgently needed to acclimatize a newly-arrived region to the currency.) My country's lowest denomination that is still being produced is worth a mill and a half (that is, 0.15 cents); I hadn't seen any action to abolish it, even as you need a dozen or more to buy anything with it. "Eliminate low denomination coins"? We did that, yes, if by "eliminate" you mean "stop producing". And if by "low denomination" you mean "under a quarter cent" (though inflation since has brought the lowest remaining denomination down to 0.15 cents). Japan didn't (at least, not since the 1950s). South Korea didn't, and their lowest denomination is even smaller than ours. Thailand didn't - the satangs are mostly out of circulation due to sheer low value, but they still make them. Philippines apparently did, but only very recently. [EDIT: changed "Korea" to "South Korea" - I keep forgetting that there are two] Edited by january1may
05/14/2016 10:01 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1005 Posts |
I really like just carl's idea. It would be great if the denomination were not indicated on the coin, but instead it was assumed people knew the denomination based on the design, i.e. everybody would know that Grover Cleveland's cocker spaniel coin was 81 cents and Garfield's dog Veto coin was 83 cents, etc.
Naturally, there would be a chart of the denominations at all cash registers for those that don't have them memorized. As you get closer to the dollar, there's no way you can ascertain value from size besides precise weighing, so having easily recognizable designs like presidents' pets and vehicles makes lots of sense.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188213 Posts |
As long as I have holes to fill, I hope they keep putting the NIFC coins in mint and proof sets.  Most everyone knows I want the cent to go NIFC and in 95% copper, but not that I wanted the half dollar to end after my last holes were filled in 2011. Now I am good until 2021, so they can stop after that.  As for the dollar coin, it really needs to circulate. Get rid of the one dollar note already. Jeez.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6326 Posts |
I won't expect rational common sense implementation from the Government on any of this anytime soon.
But...EVEN government officials have to see the stupidity of BILLIONS of dollar coins sitting "out there" not being used in daily currency, which is, after all, SUPPOSED to be the whole point of any country's mint !
They make us wear seat belts "for our own good"....well...make us use the dollar coins "for our own good" too.
With the paper dollar gone, despite grumbling & complaining, guess what...we would use them !
The $2.00 Bill is an unused unnecessary waste of money and time too, I agree. And that isn't even NIFC ! It's "intended" for daily use, commerce, and circulation. Yet most people are surprised when they see a modern $2.00 bill.
So much of the Mint is focused on being a "money/profit making business", rather than a government entity providing it's natural practical intended purpose.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3283 Posts |
I also generally agree with you but it's a business I suppose.
Not to many people would be interested in a proof set containing a quarter, dime and nickel.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
I wouldn't mind at all seeing the cent and half go NIFC, but I hope they keep putting cents and halves in proof/uncirculated sets forever. I love 'em. But that's just me.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
411 Posts |
I just bought some pages for 2x2s and coin holders please do not change sizes .
it is coming, no money just cards with chips in them.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
562 Posts |
I have, and always will, support the idea of keeping NIFC coins in mint and proof sets. As jbuck and others have pointed out, it'd be a great way to keep the heritage of the Lincoln Cent going when its removed from circulation. The sets are simply a great, cost-effective way to purchase the year's coins for a collection. |
|
Valued Member
United States
110 Posts |
I registered into this coin community forum for just this sort of thing. "Hear me oh US Mint gurus! Get rid of the one cent zinc! It is an abomination upon the land!" If Kennedy halves are not intended for circulation, dump them as well. Also, the linen one dollar bill can be replaced by all those coins they minted and stored. So that when I walk into a saloon I can toss a fistful of Sacagaweas on the bar and order a whisky. |
|
Moderator
United States
188213 Posts |
Quote:
"Hear me oh US Mint gurus! Get rid of the one cent zinc! It is an abomination upon the land!" Yes!  Quote:
Also, the linen one dollar bill can be replaced by all those coins they minted and stored. So that when I walk into a saloon I can toss a fistful of Sacagaweas on the bar and order a whisky. This person has moxie. I like it. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1499 Posts |
Your contention that coins that are not made for circulation should not be included in Proof sets because they were not made in the past in flawed. How about the "Proof only" issues like the 1895-P dollar, the 1877 and 1878 Twenty Cent Pieces and the 1877 and '78 nickels to name a few? If you cut back the Proof sets to nothing but a nickel, dime and quarter, those sets would be darn boring, and I could see the time when sales would drop to the level where they were no longer minted. As a collector, I don't care very much about the "golden dollars," but I do like the half dollar and the cent is only coin that has a continuous run of dates from 1793 to 2016, with the exception of 1815. I've often thought that putting together that date run would be interesting although I confess that I have never done it, at least not all at once. Quote:
The sets are simply a great, cost-effective way to purchase the year's coins for a collection. This is why I buy a silver Proof set every year. It allows me to commemorate every year with a set of attractive coins. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
606 Posts |
Holy....BillJones...... Quote:
the cent is only coin that has a continuous run of dates from 1793 to 2016, with the exception of 1815. I've often thought that putting together that date run would be interesting although I confess that I have never done it, at least not all at once. Off to research I think I might have found my life long challenge. |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 4,137 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/14/2016 5:08 pm
