| Author |
Replies: 23 / Views: 33,671 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3640 Posts |
Well, back then you could probably buy at least a pint of strawberries for one cent. If that one cent was a strawberry and it was handed down through generations up until today then that one cent would be worth about 250K  I know this does not help you out much but it was fun anyway 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Tough to draw a direct comparison but a good guess is somewhere between 50 cents and one dollar equivalent buying power. Depends, of course, on what you are buying. Transportation across great distances would, for example, be extraordinarily expensive and risky relative to modern equivalents. Getting to California in 1793 from New York would be comparable to taking a trip into space.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
A key thing to keep in mind is wages were about 40 cents a day for those few who labored for money. Many were indentured and did not see much of that money. Most people worked on the farm, were self sufficient, and had little or no need for currency. It isn't like you could earn $7 an hour back then and enjoy buying all kinds of cheap stuff
Edited by fenton 06/27/2013 9:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
613 Posts |
I think the posters focusing on the purchasing power in that era vs a straight mathematical calculation of historic inflation rates aggregated over time is the way to go. Various products and services are priced wildly different in today's world than in the early days of the republic.
Remember that in the far past, salt was so valuable they paid roman soldiers their salary ("salary" has same etymological root as "salt") in salt. Now you can get salt for almost pennies as extraction, refining, marketing, and transportation technologies have been perfected and have driven its value and cost down.
I'd say the key to getting the answer you need is finding one or more documented examples from the 1790s as far as what a commonly purchased product or service cost and contrast that with the perceived value of one cent today.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1812 Posts |
Quote: I need a reputable source that says something along the lines "A penny in 1793 could buy you something for $5 in today's current market."
I just bookmarked this thread as part of my Ephemera Collection includes Documents, Receipts, newspapers, etc. from Colonial America. When I have the time I'll pull it out of storage and see what may be of interest to you, then post photos. It is still possible to purchase genuine USA newspapers from the 1790's for $25.00+ price range (depending on condition) and it is not uncommon to read articles from Pres. of the United States ; G. Washington.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5208 Posts |
Another reason why coin collecting is a link to history. Imagine how many acres you could buy with 11 days work with 365 days in a year? Inflation, war, etc all playing factors into ratios. I always wondered what cuased the 1-5 year spread of low mintages of coins in the past other than the most recent ones (1929-1933 "great depression" era and 2008-2010 modern depression) Why are 1921 Mercury dimes, 1921 Walking halves, and 1921 and 1923S SLQ so rare due to low mintages? What happened between 1919 and 1923 in history? What happened in Denver in 1914 that the 1914D Lincoln Cent is so rare? 1877 Indian Head cent. The civil war ended in 1865. What happened in 1877 to decrease the mintage of the most common coin the cent?
Edited by jack jeckel 06/28/2013 10:04 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
In 1921 the country was in a post war recession as it came down from the industrial build up from WWI. The mint also used this post war slump as a chance to redirect much of their activity toward the recoining of all the silver required under the Pitman act.
In 1914 the west was still rather sparcely settled and also Philadelphia struck a much larger number of cents that year than normal. There probably just wasn't as much need for them. Coinage was probably apportioned to each mint based on local need. If there were plenty of cents available in the Denver distribution area then production would be lowered.
1877, possibly a lowering of coinage due to the flood of silver coins returning to outside the country. Coinage was flooding back into the Treasury including 1 and 5 cent pieces so there was not much need to coin more. Just ship the older coins back out again as needed.
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 33,671 |