| Author |
Replies: 23 / Views: 1,895 |
|
New Member
United States
49 Posts |
In 1982/3 The Lincoln Cent started to be made out of zinc instead of copper. Does anyone know what that is? Was it the cost of copper?
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1807 Posts |
Yes, the cent's composition was changed in 1982 because the value of the copper in the coin started to rise above one cent. Later it returned to profitable levels.
|
|
New Member
 United States
49 Posts |
So they are still being made out of zinc, though, right?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Yes.  But this might change in the near future because they cost more than a cent to make each one.
|
|
New Member
 United States
49 Posts |
Interesting! So theoretically the composition of pennies could fluctuate between copper and zinc many times in the future, as the price of either material changes. Seems like if they made them out of 50% zinc and 50% copper they could minimize their losses and not have to worry about switching.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19935 Posts |
Zinc is a LOT cheaper than copper. The cents are actually just copper plated. Just like with gold, plating is much less expensive.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Quote: So theoretically the composition of pennies could fluctuate between copper and zinc many times in the future, as the price of either material changes No, the problem is that the price of Zinc has escalated over the years. Going back to Copper would be a lot more expensive to manufacture. There are two ideas that are common on CCF. One is to use copper plated steel like Canada, the other is to stop minting the cent for circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1121 Posts |
Even with the big price swing downward in copper, I can't see the Mint ever going back to more than 3-5% copper in cents.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1077 Posts |
How does the price of steel compare to zinc? Also I wonder why the US mint went for zinc and not steel like the Canadians and British? You would have thought with the steel industry in the States in a bad way they would have lobbied for it, I know they used to have a powerful union.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1943 Posts |
I think the reason they stayed away from steel before is it is harder to strike. I would think a copper plated steel planchet would give you less coins per die then a copper plates zinc planchet. Again, this is just my guess. As far as the one cent coin I could never understand why they don't just change the denomination to 2 cents. Then the rounding problem goes away because the only total bills that won't be covered is $.01 and $.03. You can pay the right amount on any other total. If the total is $.07 you can use a nickel and the Two Cent Piece. I think this would be easier for the people would want to keep the cent to swallow. They will still have there coin, it would would just be worth one cent more. Then whatever industry is supplying the material for the coin will be satisfied because they won't eliminate the coin. I just think this is a better solution than either eliminating the cent or keeping it. What does everyone here think?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1121 Posts |
Quote:As far as the one cent coin I could never understand why they don't just change the denomination to 2 cents. Then the rounding problem goes away because the only total bills that won't be covered is $.01 and $.03. You can pay the right amount on any other total. If the total is $.07 you can use a nickel and the Two Cent Piece. I think this would be easier for the people would want to keep the cent to swallow. They will still have there coin, it would would just be worth one cent more. Then whatever industry is supplying the material for the coin will be satisfied because they won't eliminate the coin. I just think this is a better solution than either eliminating the cent or keeping it. What does everyone here think I'm sure this has been discussed in another thread, but would you rather see them eliminate the Lincoln Cent and possibly increase the value of our collections or keep the Lincoln Cent because we love it so much?
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1943 Posts |
IMO both are poor reasons to keep the one cent piece. I guess as collectors we look at coins in a different way than what they are intended for. The basic purpose of our coinage is for commerce. As inflation goes up small denominations become obsolete. But since we are creatures of habit we hate change. I just think the above solution is the best one for commerce.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
I have a hard time seeing the cent as obsolete , especially in states with sales tax , I have not gotten change from my purchases in a long time that does not include at least one cent , now If they rounded that up by eliminating the cent then its just like a tax increase .
Sorry but I'm opposed to that concept !
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1943 Posts |
Metalman, I completely understand the opposition to a tax increase. But if the coins were Two Cents instead of one cent then this isn't an issue. The only total you can't get is $.01 and $.03. When was the last time your total bill was $.01 or $.03? All other amounts are possible so rounding is not necessary. If the change you received with the cent was $2.06 then you would now get 2 $1.00 bills and 3 $.02 coins. No sales tax must be rounded. The one cent coin is really only needed for very small purchases or one cent vending machines and you rarely run into either of these any more. As I said before, this is just my opinion.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1943 Posts |
I guess the best way to explain this is changing the cent to a Two Cent Piece would not change how much you spend or how much you receive, it will only change the number of coins you receive. Does that help to explain?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Quote:I guess the best way to explain this is changing the cent to a Two Cent Piece would not change how much you spend or how much you receive, it will only change the number of coins you receive. Does that help to explain? I can't see us bringing back a Two Cent coin. If we want to save minting costs you just eliminate the one cent piece and don't replace it with anything. The cost savings of going to a Two Cent Piece would be minimal. With the stagflation/deflation we are going to experience over the next couple years, I can't foresee any changes being made or even proposed. When inflation kicks in hard again in 2011, the whole senario will once again recurr. My bet is the one cent piece will be gone by 2015 and not replaced. All amounts will be rounded to the nearest $0.05. By then a loaf of bread will be $10 so it won't make much difference!
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 1,895 |