Doge Seeking To Close San Francisco Mint

Combining data from a couple of pages: (site not allowed?) for metal value and https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-c...sts-for-2024 for production costs...

Metal value / Production cost / Overhead (difference between the two)
Cent: 0.77¢ / 3.69¢ / 2.92¢
Nickel: 5.67¢ / 13.78¢ / 8.11¢
Dime: 2.34¢ / 5.76¢ / 3.42¢
Quarter: 5.85¢ / 14.68¢ / 8.83¢
Half: 11.70¢ / 33.97¢ / 22.27¢

I'm surprised at the variances here and have no explanation. Just throwing it out there, since we're talking about labor and such, distinct from the actual metal.

Yes, of course. The reason I said "enough people in enough places" is because this is a tiny part of a much larger initiative that targets the elimination of roughly three orders of magnitude more jobs. I think that context is relatively clear (except apparently in the language I used

If so desired, sell the SF Mint to Daniel Carr. I'm sure he be able to run it at a profit, especially if he gets the rights to "S" Mint products with an "official" label attached to it.

I suspect this statement is accurate. Overall, mint operations are profitable. Probably that means the profits are returned to the general fund (via the Treasury), reducing the deficit by a tiny amount each year, which means it indeed reduced the rate of increase of the national debt (by a tiny amount).
But context is everything ... the national debt is now $36 trillion. So mint profits generated over nearly 30 years have reduced the national debt by 0.05% if my math is correct.

Yep, it's a tiny number, but it's better than ADDING to the national debt!
Maybe this is the point we should be making in our complaints to our elected officials "Why is DOGE messing with around with a part of the government that ACTUALLY MAKES MONEY!"

I think the point still stands. There is a large value-add between the raw metal stage and the finished coin. Even if the Mint is purchasing intermediate materials (plated zinc planchets, sheets of clad metal), they still pay for that value-add. Inflation has permanently moved the line to where the value-add steps will always cost more than 1¢.

Some great comments. By the way the US Mint did do research on changing metal composition of coins well after 1982 - but Congress has always ignored the recommendations. Congress would rather have approved another set of commemorative coins who history is showing diminishing sales. THe San Fran mint makes more than commemorative sets, proof sets and medals as well as, yes, some commemoratives.

If congress actually did revise drastically our denominations and the metal value of coins for usage in 2025, there would be large savings. Instead we have DOGE doing what it has done to the National Weather Service, cutting costs which worsen weather prediction. In this case the 17 billion has been since 1996 and comes to about 550 million a year it has contributed to national revenue. And all from numismatic sales. Why in God's name would DOGE even consider such a stupid idea to close the San Fran mint? The only case I could see it being closed is if production rates of circulating coinage were set at levels not seen since the early 20th century with some denominations phased out and the employment of $1 and $2 coins. Then I could see a reason to shift production of numismatic coins to the P, D and W mints. .

Without being too religious or political, I think we're at the far other end of the spectrum from God on this one......

Nah. I am going to go out on a limb and say they are targeted for being in California, generally, and San Francisco specifically.