| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 4,429 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
Edited by SteveCaruso
02/10/2012 01:22 am
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
62 Posts |
I don't know about that. Our government's debt keeps going up like never before. Obama added more debt in his ONE term than ALL other presidents COMBINED! And the next president will do the same on top of that. Even if we were to break even with costs, our debt interest rates are so ridiculous!
I don't think them making coins is at the top of their list. :) JMHO
|
|
Valued Member
United States
292 Posts |
So...in the early 60's they started hoarding silver coinage due to the intrinsic value being one cent more than the face value? And they revised the compositions to stop the hoarding? And then in the 80's the same thing happened with pennies? And you're stating that the same thing will happen with the nickel in the near future?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2295 Posts |
The nickel and quarter intrinsic values for 2012 are too low. They should be 11 cents each as per page 11 of the US Mint's 2011 annual report. I imagine they'll both go up over 12 cents each for this year too. http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_min...nnual_reportAnd for the 1964 side, you need a silver quarter and not a clad one.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
Quote:
our debt interest rates are so ridiculous! I have no idea what this has to do with debasement of the nickel, but interest rates are extremely low. They're so low that the interest rate is actually negative when accounting for inflation. Interest payments on the debt are actually lower than some previous years even though the total debt is higher because of low interest rates. Quote:
The nickel and quarter intrinsic values for 2012 are too low. They should be 11 cents each as per page 11 of the US Mint's 2011 annual report. The values from the mint report include manufacturing and distribution costs, not just the intrinsic value of the metal. The formula is actually a lot simpler than the graphic. The manufacturing, distribution and materials costs for a nickel are greater than the face value of the nickel. No need to even consider the intrinsic value of the metal (recycling a nickel would not recover five cents; there is cost to separate the metals), or the intrinsic value of a quarter. |
|
Moderator
 United States
187862 Posts |
Quote:
I don't think them making coins is at the top of their list. It should be. It has the easiest, cheapest, and quickest fix... stop minting cents and nickels for circulation, stop printing the one dollar note, and continue minting one dollar coins. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
One thing being assumed is that "melting nickels" denotes creating a pure material in the end. There are many industrial users for CuNi alloys which would not require refinement, just tweaking the alloy. This would only require melting, not refining, thereby having the value closer to intrinsic as a raw material. Heck, look up prices of CuNi washers.....it is cheaper to drill a hole in a nickel than to buy the washer....lol same goes for quarters and halves!
Edited by unholyroller
02/10/2012 3:07 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
187862 Posts |
The point is that the value of the metal is irrelevant, regardless of the actual recycling costs. As noted above, even if the material were free, the manufacture and distribution of cents and nickels costs more than their face value.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1796 Posts |
@wquinn - Nah, you're looking at production cost, not intrinsic value. It takes 11-12 cents to manufacture each one, including metal, labor and transport. As jbuck and captainfwiffo pointed out in their responses, even if the metal was free, the production cost would be higher than the face value... As for the clad vs. silver quarter you're absolutely correct. In that case ... well I was lazy. :-)
@unholyroller - Good point! Hehe using them as washers would be like burning Deutschmark notes post WW2 for heat.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
@ContraJame - I'm saying that we're seeing not only a similar pattern, but the exact same pattern as in 1964: Melting ban in place. Mint experimenting with new compositions. Intrinsic value exceeding face value. It's going to be interesting to actually experience it happen, though. :-)
Edited by SteveCaruso
02/10/2012 9:15 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
527 Posts |
Yeah I believe it is a matter of when and NOT if the composition change happens. My guess is the year 2013. I was not alive when the silver coins were debased and subsequently hoarded (I was born in 1985) so it will be interesting to see how things turn out.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
I'm thinking 2014. The results of the study of materials is due at the end of 2012. I expect them to spend 2013 debating it and coming to a decision then implementing it in 2014. What worries me is that the decision will be to do another study and they will continue throwing money down a rat hole until 2017 or later.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
I love the nickel but I think we will soon see the end of minting the US coins intended for circulation since we all know that there will never be a silver and gold nickel and copper standard in coinage in the future. After a while there won't be any coinage and currency at all. Just plastic cards. I bet that soon enough people will whip out their cell phone and use that to make transactions at the speedy checkout lane with those by linking to an account in some way. Remember when you would go to the Supermarket and go through the express line with cash only and less than 7 items? Now it's hardly and express lane since every body has to root trough for a card and swipe it and enter info in the pad. Each UPC has to be scanned and half have to be manually entered by the "cashier". If they use cash, the "cashier" can barely do the math. |
|
Pillar of the Community
527 Posts |
Quote:
I'm thinking 2014. The results of the study of materials is due at the end of 2012. I expect them to spend 2013 debating it and coming to a decision then implementing it in 2014. That sounds like a reasonable opinion, and is very possible to happen. Quote:
What worries me is that the decision will be to do another study and they will continue throwing money down a rat hole until 2017 or later. Sadly, this also is a reasonable opinion. I just pray that our country doesn't debate THAT much longer over something that is so (seemingly) simple. What is horrible is that this two year study basically says "We still have to mint these coins at a loss to taxpayers for the 7th year in a row." I mean, sheesh. |
|
Valued Member
United States
61 Posts |
This is interesting. I have heard things about nickels, but I never really thought about it. This got me thinking, thanks for the image.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
126 Posts |
The devaluing of the dollar has been happening for so long. You should add a "spending power" comparison to this chart.
|
| |
Replies: 20 / Views: 4,429 |
Posted 02/10/2012 10:48 am
