| Author |
Replies: 52 / Views: 5,910 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
532 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1431 Posts |
I'd sooner embrace plated steel or no 5c piece at all before accepting another plated zinc coin.
Zinc is such a terrible metal for coins, and I hate it with a passion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1234 Posts |
Just like everything else any government does, they will tell us it's for our own good (saving taxpayers $11 million a year, Nickel metal allergy can cause itching to 10% of the population). Then they will shove it down our throat and demand we thank them for it.
Here's another thing has any Canadian seen any impact in their tax return since they saved you $11 million a year, or did they just raise the rates a little less then they had planed?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2805 Posts |
You're right! It's best to keep wasting money. Thanks Obama!
So what is the downside of this change, other than a vague anti-government resentment? Should it be put to plebiscite or what?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
532 Posts |
I'm still trying to get over the penny being gone. It's sad that we had it decided for us. It was also a mini inflation jump because you know stores took advantage of the rounding off to the nickle to raise prices to their advantage. Also that if you pay with any kind of plastic you still pay to the penny. Thank God I can still get silver coins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
997 Posts |
I think Canada has been on the right track recently. Plated steel is fairly cheap and seem to work well in vending machines. It provides a similar look and feel to what we are used to here. US vending machine folks will have to alter their machines to accept steel coins, but it looks like they are gonna have to do that for whatever is chosen.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Interesting. To me it seems like a compromise to eliminate the cent. It should placate Jarden, allowing them to shift their zinc product from cent to five cent planchets.
However, I believe that we really need to eliminate both the cent and nickel from circulation. People will just have to deal with it, like we have before. The nickel has less purchasing power than the half-cent when it was eliminated.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
965 Posts |
Yikes! That would be awful, would much prefer plated steel to that. Zinc is a terrible choice for coinage, it will rot simply by touching water. Also, seeing as how the mint seems fine with losing money on the cent, they might as well make the nickel out of a metal that won't dissolve after changing hands a few times. Can we also change the cent back to copper? 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote: "I give the American public a lot of credit," Peterson said. "If we gave them a proper public relations campaign about what we are going to do and why we are going to do it, people will get on board and support the program." Like they did with the small sized dollar. Quote: After spending $8.1 million on research, scientists discovered six potential metal alloys for pennies, nickels, dimes, and quarters that could save the government between $30 and $40 million a year. The copper-plated zinc option for nickels that I have in my hand is just one of them. Even if it does work for the nickel it will be just a temporary stop gap measure. It currently cost close to 9 cents to produce each five cent piece and almost 4 cents of that is production cost not materials. So the copper plated zinc would have to cost less than 1 cent to make it profitable. Even if it is now that can't last and in a year or so we will be right back in the same spot we are now losing money on every five cent piece made. Production costs for the cent are from 1 to 1.4 cents apiece not including materials so there is NO material that would make cents a non-losing proposition. They would cost more than their face value even if the material was free. Quote: By taking away the copper base of some coins, all coin accepting machines would have to be recalibrated to accept currency with a new metal signature. Even worse they would have to be calibrated to accept BOTH types of coinage. Probably something the current mechanisms can't do. That would mean all new mechanisms that would have to be developed after the mint finally makes their announcements about the changes. Frankly it would be much simpler, easier, and cheaperto just eliminate the cent and five cent and leave the alloy of the rest of the coins alone.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Please, and I mean this sincerely, will someone educate me on a couple aspects of coins and re-alloying them...
1) why is it so important that a coin be made "at a profit"? The government is not a "for profit" entity. 2) why do people look at a coin as a one time use item? A coin or note is a representative device for value...and it does not transact just one time then "poof" it is gone. Coins and notes transact many dozens, hundreds or even thousands of times in its useful life, so what is wrong with doing it right and making a nickel out of cupro-nickel which will last 100 years? Instead we want to cheapen the construction and make it last ten years? This makes no sense
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
965 Posts |
Just had an awesome idea, why not make the new nickel with the same composition as the new plated steel canadian nickel? Vending machine components for accepting those are already widely available and those same machines are programmed to also take the old 1982-1999 nickels that have the same composition as our current US nickels. Also this new zinc "nickel" that they are proposing wouldn't really be brown as much as black and green... yuck.
Edited by 1967Canadapenny 01/17/2014 11:28 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
213 Posts |
They're not trying to profit off of the coins they just want the production cost less or equal to the face value of the coinage. They also have to pay the labor and equipment on top of the cheap metal.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Quote: They're not trying to profit off of the coins they just want the production cost less or equal to the face value of the coinage. They also have to pay the labor and equipment on top of the cheap metal. Actually they are trying to profit. It is called seinorage and is the profit they make when the sell the coins at face value to the banks. I am also pretty sure when you see the published "cost" of making any coin, it takes into account the labor and machinery overhead. My guess for the prefered use of Zinc... Lower cost to manufacture + low survivability in circulation = have to make more coins more often Making more coins more often when they cost less to make than face value = more profits for the government hobgoblins Let's pretend for a moment that both a cupronickel and zinc made five cent piece cost exactly the same to manufacture @ 4¢ each. If you make 500,000,000 cupronickel 5¢ pieces the seinorage is $5,000,000...a tidy profit. And let's pretend they last 100 years and none are lost to carelessness...that every one of the 500,000,000 remain in circulation for 100 years, the treasury makes five million dollars Now if you make 500,000,000 zinc 5¢ pieces which last ten years and assuming the same rules as above, none are lost to carelessness, you would need to make another 500,000,000 coins in ten years, or over the same 100 years....make 5,000,000,000 coins for a seinorage of $50,000,000.....this is the government people...which do you think they will choose? 
Edited by unholyroller 01/17/2014 12:14 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Quote: 1) why is it so important that a coin be made "at a profit"? The government is not a "for profit" entity. The Mint is. Without their profits, the taxpayers pay the difference. Right now profits on higher denominations and NCLT sales cover the cost of making cents and nickels. When that is no longer true, taxes will go up. Quote: 2) why do people look at a coin as a one time use item? Because cents are. The majority are used once (given as change) and end up in change jars and trash cans. If only more people would pay with those cents, or at least return them to the bank more often.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
368 Posts |
i reuse my cents coins all the time. when I get something and it is like $1.08 I will pay with all pennies for the 8 cents. sometimes I even pay using rolls of cents.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2805 Posts |
Are you guys forgetting the Canadian story here?
1922 - 1981: 99.9% nickel 1982 - 2006: Copper-nickel 2000 - now: MPPS alloy
Every single one of these nickels is accepted in the same vending machine.
Now we move on to the weirdos who feel shafted by their government, as they weren't given the chance to decide on this.
How would you put this negligible issue to the public? Would they vote on every other minute change planned to anything? Would they care about any of them? No! Nobody but us care about the penny and nickel, and your collecting interests are basically unimportant here. The penny is not going to circulate for 100 years, and neither will the nickel - the rate of inflation is going to be too much and a redenomination would lead to new coins entirely. The only country to keep its small change the same after taking some zeros off the money would be the glorious USSR.
The nickel is going to be an antiquity in 50 years, much less 100. Swiss 5 rappen is aluminum bronze, 5 euro cent is copper-plated steel, Chinese 5 wu jiao is brass-plated steel, Tunisian 100 million is brass, British 5p is plated steel... Face the rest of the world! Only the USA can be so resolutely backward in this manner.
|
| |
Replies: 52 / Views: 5,910 |