| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 3,856 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1256 Posts |
I'm trying to think of a good reason to do this. Short of maybe inventory, I'm at a lose. Can someone list some reasons?
Don't get me wrong, as a collector I like the idea of dates and mints. But, as a citizen I'm thinking it would reduce costs. Mint the same coins over and over and stop changing them. When and where a coin was minted means nothing when I'm spending it.
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
here's one...
if the mint ever wants to experiment with different coin compositions and they want a control, it would have to be a certain date, because the mint may pull a really really worn and tattered coin out of circulation and think it's part of the control group even though its not.
and, people like having dates on coins
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1729 Posts |
Germany and the Philippines did just what you suggested, amongst other countries. Borrrring!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
Spain, under Franco,did that a lot ot the PTAS are dated 1957. They used a punched mark on the reverse to designate mint year.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1397 Posts |
I suppose it could be done like the BEP does notes. They print the same front back generic series for years and then pass it through another print that puts the two seals & serial numbers on it. The same idea could apply to coin. Have a generic die stamping out coin and pass it through a second that would stamp a date on it. Then the only thing that would need to change every year would be the date/mint.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, as a collector I like the idea of dates and mints. But, as a citizen I'm thinking it would reduce costs. It would do virtually nothing for costs. Dates and mintmarks are not hand punched any more so there is no manual labor aspect. Thousands of dies still need to be produced every year and removing dates and mintmarks does nothing to lessen that work load. In fact, the US Mint is one of a very few government agencies that actually turns a profit(FY2010 totaled $388 million on almost $3.9 billion in revenue). Profits cover all operating costs and the remainder is returned to the treasury, the Mint receives no federal appropriations at all so there is no tax money aspect to mint operations. |
|
Moderator
 United States
187446 Posts |
Doing what you suggest would only be worthwhile if there was a shortage of coins. And guess what? They did that in 1965 to alleviate a coin shortage. They did not actually remove the date, they froze it; but they did remove the mint marks.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1256 Posts |
Testing, good one Adam. And I agree, pls ...borrrring :)
Biokemist6: That makes sense. I was confusing production costs with the value of metal which is the real debate. Thousands of working dies correct? Not master hubs, master dies, working hubs? Still these now seem like trivial costs compared to the profit margin you stated.
So forget costs :)
Still looking for reasons why we have dates and mint marks. What purpose do they serve?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1256 Posts |
Thanks Jbuck. Reading about The Coinage Act of 1965 is what has me thinking about it.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187446 Posts |
I suspected as much.  |
|
Moderator
Australia
16805 Posts |
The short answer to the question, "Why do we put dates and mintmarks on coins when they appear to serve no obvious useful purpose?", is "Tradition".
Traditionally, mintmarks helped with quality control. In mediaeval times, if the government found large numbers of "official-looking" coins that appeared to have been struck with genuine dies but were inferior in weight and quality, the government would be able to tell when and where the debasement happened and prosecute the offending mint-master. Their continued use today is largely irrelevant, except perhaps to statisticians who might be able to derive useful information about currency movements within a country by studying the relative proportions of the different mintmarks at different locations.
Dates on coins were, and in theory still are, helpful in recalling old coinage or otherwise controlling the currency. The statisticians can also use the dates: when worn-out or damaged coinage is returned for melting down and re-issue, statistical analysis of the dates can tell the government how long it's coins last in circulation, and therefore helps to estimate the need for striking new coins. The government also has the right to declare that "All coins struck before 1980..." or whenever "...are no longer legal tender.". Under such circumstances, dates on coins allow not just the government but the public as well to easily tell which coins are good and which coins aren't good any more.
These particular traditions do no harm and in fact earn money from the government, because coin collectors feel compelled to keep one of each date-and-mintmark; each coin you keep is one the government has to replace, making a profit as it does so. So as long as each coin remains profitable to produce and the "keep rate" does not exceed the minting capacity of the mints, I suspect the practice will continue.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4000 Posts |
Sap, you never cease to amaze me.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
809 Posts |
I agree with Scooby!!  |
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 3,856 |
|
Posted 03/16/2011 11:51 am
