| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 1,397 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4867 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2311 Posts |
Why not change the nickel to a different metal?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
10 cents for a nickel seems high
|
|
Valued Member
United States
161 Posts |
They should have stopped minting pennies a long time ago. As for the nickel, I think I read an article in Numismatic News that the mint spend $ on two years of research to see if there are cheaper metals they could use for their coinage. After two year and a lot of $$ they came out with nothin. Currently, they are using the cheapest metals possible. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
If pennies and nickels were made of lint, they'd still cost more to make and circulate than their face value.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
(As a side note, the metal content in a nickel is now above its face value again. A roll of nickels is "worth" $2.15.)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
997 Posts |
Even if the materials for the penny (and this is rapidly approaching truth for the nickle as well) were free it would cost more than face value to produce the coin. At this cost it is not worth it to make these low value coins.
Unless they want to do something drastic like revalue the dollar by a factor of 10 then elimination of the cent and nickle is in order. In other threads we discussed a couple issues with this, and by having the smallest coin as a dime, a 20 cent coin makes more sense than a quarter, and a half dollar makes more sense than it does now.
If they got real smart they would eliminate the cent and nickle as well as the $1 and $2 bill. A great line up would be coins at 10, 20 and 50 cents as well as $1 and @2 and then bills in denominations of $10, 20, 50, 100 and 200. 5 coins paired with 5 bills. Every change amount viable within 5 cents.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188001 Posts |
Quote:
If pennies and nickels were made of lint, they'd still cost more to make and circulate than their face value.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
A great line up would be coins at 10, 20 and 50 cents as well as $1 and @2 and then bills in denominations of $10, 20, 50, 100 and 200. 5 coins paired with 5 bills. Every change amount viable within 5 cents.
HAVE to have a 5 dollar something. If you bought something for 2.10 no one wants 2 20 cent coins, a 50 cent, a 1 dollar coin, and 3 two dollar bills |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4867 Posts |
I'm not sure they're already using the cheepest metals. I think they could use the same composition as the Canadian nickel.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3692 Posts |
They say Canada stopped minting them last week. Not true. They stopped minting them back in May 2012 or so. The only stopped being distributed to banks last week. Details.
A nickel costs 10 cents? No.
1946-2013 Nickel
$0.05 FV
$0.0531607 BV
106.32%
If they can't do simple math there then the rest of what they say is void.
Edited by Libertad
02/11/2013 8:17 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
@TheForce - As was mentioned earlier. Even if the material was *free* (as in gratis, as in it costs nothing) the cost to circulate them is above face value (hence my "lint" comment).
A penny costs 2.1-2.5 cents to make and circulate. Only 0.5 cents of that is the intrinsic value of the zinc and the thin copper plating. The extra 2 cents is the cost of prepping the planchets, striking them, and shipping them. So, if the zinc and copper were eliminated... it still costs 2 cents to make and ship a penny.
A nickel is in a similar problem, as it costs the mint 11.5-12 cents a piece to make.
EDIT: @Libertad - That's only the intrinsic value of the metal, not the full cost of production and shipping per unit. A nickel has more than 5 cents worth of metal in it, and it costs 6-7 cents to turn that metal into a nickel and ship it out to banks.
Edited by SteveCaruso
02/11/2013 8:24 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
56 Posts |
At some point a decision based on economic feasibility will be what decides whether our cent survives. At the end of the day the bottom line always ends up setting policy.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
From the 2012 annual mint report:
The cent last year cost 2.0 cents apiece to make and distribute. This is down from 2011 (2.41 cents) but up from 2010 (1.79 cents each)
The five cent in 2012 cost 10.09 cents apiece to manufacture and distribute. This compares to 11.18 cents in 2011 and 9.22 cents in 2010.
Overall losses for the cent and nickel for the last three years were
Cent 2010 $27 million, 2011 $60 million, 2012 $58 million
5 cent 2010 $15 million, 2011 $57 million, and 2012 $51 million
This year the Mint made a profit on the circulation coins of $105 million. This was down for $348 million in 2011. And the only reason this years profit is that high was because the fiscal year included the last three months of 2011 and the last of the 2011 President dollars. Those dollars accounted for $77 million of that $105 million. With out them the mint would have only made $28 million. When you are only showing a $28 million dollar profit, does it make any since to be making two coins that account for a $109 million dollar loss?
Remember the profit the mint makes gets turned over to the Treasury General Fund. Thanks to the Congress ending the circulation dollar and not stopping the dollar note, and not discontinuing the two losing coins we are heading from turning over $348 Million to turning over $28 million. An income loss to the government of $310 million dollars.
Edited by Conder101
02/12/2013 11:00 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
@Conder101 - Thanks for the latest stats.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 1,397 |
|
Posted 02/11/2013 4:24 pm
