I got this in my email this morning.
Quote:
H.R. 770 calls for a 56-coin program with dollar reverses celebrating a significant innovation, an innovator, or a group of innovators within each state, the District of Columbia and the five U.S. territories.
Obverses would depict a likeness of the Statue of Liberty that extends to the coin's rim and was large enough to provide a dramatic representation of Liberty.
OK - so here we go again. I am certain now the concept is that they don't care about learning from their mistakes. They want profits no matter the cost to taxpayers.
They wasted so much money with the presidential series that are now stored in plastic bags at taxpayer expense:
Source: Federal Reserve
Credit: Robert Benincasa, Christina Baird, Nelson Hsu
https://www.npr.org/2011/06/28/1373...nobody-wantsThis article from 2011 explains one billion stored at taxpayer expense and more expected.
An interesting quote from the article
Quote:
But in a report to Congress last year, the Federal Reserve said the coins are now being held "with no perceivable benefit to the taxpayer," and that banks are sending them back to the Fed in increasing numbers.
"We have no reason to expect demand to improve," the Fed said. "We also note that a 2008 Harris poll found that more than three fourths of people questioned continue to prefer the $1 note."
No kidding - history has shown this over, and over, and over, and over even back to the days of the
Morgan dollar being issued (although we love them now).
Quote:
Still, dollar coin proponents, including some advocacy groups and vending-based industries, are undeterred.
Leslie Paige, who represents watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste, says the government should withdraw the dollar bill from the market and force Americans to use the coins.
"I think Americans will definitely embrace the dollar coin if they're just given the opportunity," she says.
As for the Harris Poll showing Americans don't want dollar coins, Paige says, "I suspect that they just don't understand what the up sides are," including the fact that coins don't need to be disposed of as bills are.
Don't you just love how people of authority view us peons as ignorant when it comes to trying to sell their own ideas?
Yes Mrs. Paige, ignore the facts of the poll. Tell the average Joe he is dumb enough that the ability to discern whether or not he wants coins in his pockets instead of bills in his wallet is too high educationally for him to understand. He needs a nanny. Next they will be telling us to use buttons or zippers b/c we don't know enough to make the decision for ourselves.
*For newcomers of this discussion on the forum, see the large bit of background at the end of this post.
The article then goes on to make the same revelation I personally have posted on this forum before - the coins end up costing the taxpayer money.
Here is what they say:
Quote:
But if moving exclusively to dollar coins would save money, the question is, whose money? Certainly, issuing the coins and having them circulate, rather than sit in vaults, would create a source of revenue for the government.
Whether taxpayers would benefit is another matter.
A Government Accountability Office study out this spring says that switching to a dollar coin "would provide a net benefit to the government" of about $5.5 billion over 30 years.
But it's not because coins are cheaper. The report says the government would not recover the cost of switching from bills to coins over that period.
Instead, the benefit to the government would come only from the profit it makes by manufacturing each coin for 30 cents and selling it to the public for a dollar.
When this profit, known as seigniorage, is factored out, switching to the dollar coin would actually cost taxpayers money over three decades, according to a Federal Reserve analysis of the GAO's figures. The cost works out to $3.4 billion.
Note the feds deliberately left this out of their initial report about introducing the presidential series, making the decision look much better on paper.
Quote:
The Fed's Louise Roseman wrote to the GAO seigniorage should not be considered in an analysis of whether the switch would benefit the larger U.S. economy.
So now we have a direct note from, the Fed that they deliberately did not include the 3.4 billion cost to consumers in the report also.
There were also other costs not accounted for in the governmental study on the issuance of
Presidential dollar coins. Its been a few years ago when I joined the debate, downloaded, read, checked the math, analyzed what other hidden costs were left out of the report, and then posted the findings while asking for help determining my mistakes.
Quote:
The reason, says Roseman, director of the Fed's Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems, is that seigniorage "is a revenue transfer from the private sector to the government."
So, in other words, a tax? The profit to the government predicted by the GAO assumes that the government would have to issue 1.5 dollar coins for every dollar bill removed from circulation. That's because people handle coins differently than they do bills.
Even if all dollar bills were replaced with coins, some say the nation's evident distaste for dollar coins will simply mean more small transactions will be done electronically. And, it could accelerate a technological trend toward payments with mobile devices.
So now we have an official statement the switch is not about helping the average Joe, and they knew it all along. They knew the
Presidential dollar coin would cost the private sector and chose not to put that into their report - after all, they stood to make a HUGE profit.
So now we are about to waste more taxpayer billions while, likely, once again being told it will save taxpayer money.
No, we don't have to wonder why they don't learn from their mistake. Its all about perspective. Its not a mistake to them when they stand to make billions at the peoples' expense.
Oh well, besides the gimmicky REV being changed all the time, maybe they will look nice. Maybe they will make silver issues for collectors so at least some of them will hold their value.
Look out
RCM - the US mint is trying to become as gimmicky as you are. Next we will see a mini, 3D capital building glues onto the surface of a "coin."
*To newcomers to this discussion on this forum, please check the forum for the posts where our Canadian CCF members, who were there for the intro of the Loonie, and OLD ENOUGH to be an active part of the economy (not just kids admiring the new idea) say about it. In short. Yes, they are pocket weights and were seen that way. No, they did not like being forced against their will. Yes, the coins started all Canadians to have an even larger excess of change (which continues to this day). Yes, prices soon were raised to 1.00 on things that were normally less since the the dollar became the new "quarter. Yes, rising prices warranted the need of a $2.00 coin (which were referred to as a reason to "reinforce their pockets yet again" by their own news agency). Yes, these 1.00 and 2.00 coins have been used long enough now in Canada that those making up the ciurrent, active members of the economy were not the active, adult members of the Canadian economy back when these changes were made. Using paper vs. coin is not something the current Canadian generation has personally experienced; hence opinions, for them, are based on theory and not practice. Yes, the coins hinder the economy in that consumers end up paying for the costs banks and other companies dealing with shipping metal vs. paper have to endure. These organizations pass on the costs to consumers. Yes, taxpayer money is saved on bureaucratic paper (well - maybe), but the average Joe on the street loses money.
Posted 01/19/2018 12:54 pm
