Dollar Coin Crusade Would Cost Businesses, Taxpayers
by Randy DeCleeneThe United States federal government faces some daunting economic challenges. From the debt to the deficit to our credit rating to joblessness, we are staring down the barrel of a gun, economically speaking. There are occasional signs that Washington is beginning to get serious about addressing these problems, such as the emergence of Rep. Paul Ryan as the intellectual force behind conservative economic policy. Sadly, there are just as many, probably many more, examples that Washington doesn’t get it.
Place the latest effort to shred the paper dollar and replace it permanently with the dollar coin in the latter category.
As the Hill puts it, “Rep. David Schweikert (Ariz.) and two other House Republicans — including supercommittee co-chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) — introduced legislation last week aimed at retiring the paper dollar. Schweikert said his bill would save billions of dollars over the next few decades by transitioning to a dollar coin in four years, or as soon as $600 million worth of dollar coins are in circulation.”
Schweikert should be commended for thinking imaginatively about how to save taxpayers money. But in this case he’s being a little too imaginative. Imposing the unpopular dollar coin on an unwilling American public (previous dollar coin mandates have flopped) – and more importantly, small businesses – will actually increase costs on American taxpayers. In fact, it already is.
The current, more reserved mandate has done nothing to spur the use of dollar coins. Instead these coins are handed out as change by the Post Office and DC Metro stations and customers almost immediately give them to their children as trinkets. As the Washington Times pointed out in a recent editorial, “This utterly wasteful program is costing us a billion, and it’s a perfect example of why this country is going bankrupt.”
The dollar coin is so unpopular with the public there are a billion of them sitting unused in Federal Reserve vaults. Businesses don’t use them and people don’t want them. Dollar coins take 32 cents to produce, a fact not taken into account by Rep. Schweikert. The General Accounting Office estimates that eliminating the dollar bill would increase costs on the American taxpayer by $3.5 billion over the current system.
This proposed change will also create new costs for small businesses. Dollar coins are more expensive to transport because they weighsignificantly more than their paper equivalents. Small businesses will carry this burden, not giant corporations, who would be better equipped to absorb the expenses. GE doesn’t use cash registers, Mom and Pop do.
As Stan Collendar has written with regard to the last dollar coin go-round, “What Congress didn’t realize or care about when it authorized the golden dollar was that it costs businesses more to get coins than billsbecause they’re heavier and the delivery charges from Brinks or some other armored carrier are higher. Plus, you had to order dollar coins in bags of 2000, which is way more than most retailers need and want to keep in their safes. Because consumers ultimately didn’t care whether they got a dollar bill or dollar coin when they made a purchase, businesses saw no reason to pay extra to have the coins delivered or to take the extra risk of having them in their safes.”
We have dollar coins now. They are unpopular and unused. The market has already decided on the dollar coin. Rep. Schweikert should pay attention.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
124 Comments
Well, then this is just par for the course, because government specializes in wasting our money……
Dollar coins are about as popular as a three dollar bill. However, if the coins were of gold or silver, they would probably be quite popular.
Funny to speak of "the market" when dealing with money. The market doesn't like the dollar at all – that is why government will ARREST those making a parallel currency. That is why government MANDATES the acceptance of the now worthless dollar for all debts public AND PRIVATE. In the past, government would not go so far – merely saying they are the only currency accepted to pay TAXES was enough. Read the Creature from Jekyll Island.
Of course, this is a government that made possessing GOLD illegal – think about that. That is what makes the whole business of this country being a bastion of liberty laughable.
Wasting tax payer's money should be a crime with a mandatory 20 year federal prison sentence. That would put a stop to this insanity.
They have them ready to be released.
They are called the Amero.
I like Ron Paul's idea for legalizing competing currencies. Let the market — made up of millions of individuals making their own decisions — decide what medium of exchange people want to use.
We have legal tender laws because our money is all but worthless. The government has to force us to use it because it knows a free market would choose something other than paper that is backed by "the full faith and credit" of a bunch of morons in Washington.
penny for your thoughts. Just my two cents.
Did you have to disinfect your keyboard after typing that?
It's an idiotic idea. You'll need a small duffel bag to carry a few hundred dollars worth of coins. Whoever thought of this should be flogged.
Those dollar coins are nearly as worthless as the paper currency. No wonder the government wants to spend money making them.
Naw, they be so small we would lose them all the time!
Or even Nickle or Copper!
I respectfully disagree with your position on dollar coins. For starters it is misleading of you to use the Carter Quarter as the only picture in your story. The new dollar coins have a far different color and feel from both other coins as well as the Susan B. Anthony coin. Second is that a dollar coin is expected to last a minimum of twenty years as opposed to only a few years for a printed bill.
While you do have a point about coins having higher transportation costs, the current economic mismanagement by this regime is reducing all of our currency to chump change. Switching over to a dollar coin will serve as a stark reminder about the results of Left-wing economic policies.
Canada has the dollar coin (Looney..named after a lunatic). I don't know how that saved them money but when you go shopping and get change in dollars, your purse or wallet weighs ten times as much. Plus they have the "Tooney" ( two dollar coin which is bigger) and I don't have to mention the weight of those combined.
So try depositing that into an ATM. You can't.
Even with the convenience of paper money, it always has the same drawback. As proven with the US Dollar, it is backed by empty words and has been loosing its value ever since. Pretty much why all paperbacks are Fiat Currency.
I was kind of thinking the idea to put the dollar back into coin anyway, since the coin always has value of its own due to material and is backed by that. Like for example the old $20 gold coin that is worth well over 100 fold of its original value now.
A currency change will not be easy, but as the current dollar looses value, the market would choose to move to a currency that holds more value. I guess only time will tell.
I woneder whose image would adorn this new coin?
Gee, every other country in the world seems to be able to get along with a $1 and even $2 (or local equivalent) coins without all the false histrionics and hand wringing. The biggest problem is that in the past the dollars coins were placed in service with the paper dollar also in circulation. Yank all the paper dollars and replace them with coins and everyone would adapt in a huge hurry. I for one look forward to a $1 coin and even a $2 coin – provided they do not use Susan B. Anthony (looks a tad too much like George Washington).
"Of course, this is a government that made possessing GOLD illegal…"
What's even better is that when it confiscated the gold, it paid below market value for it. In other words, it stole money from people who were forced to hand over their gold.
What a nice government we have.
What a brilliant idea. I just love the notion that if this passes, I can look forward to throwing away my billfold and being weighed down by wonderful, lovely coinage. I'm just giddy at no longer having a choice and the anticipation of jingling and clinking coins in my pocket. Heck, I'll be able to take off my spurs and let my wonderful coins jingle and jangle.
Then we would need to buy pants made with Kevlar pockets.
Eventually the dollar will collapse. It's inevitable. Governments simply can't resist the temptation to keep printing and inflating a paper currency. Its value will return to zero, which is really where it's always been in actuality, and something else will replace it.
I'd like to think the market will determine the replacement, but it's more likely a new fiat currency will be forced upon us by our government or by a coalition of governments around the world.
If they hadn't devalued the dollar so badly, it would not even need considering.
Additionally, these people need to stop talking about savings over decades, and start cutting hundreds of billions *this* year.
All they're doing is counting tens of years to make the insignificant cuts look 10 times larger.
We shouldn't add another coin until getting rid of an old. No new dollar until you get rid of the increasingly more worthless penny. That would save transport costs and few except marketers who insist on every price ending in 9 would be pissed.
this is the monetary version of virtually all "green" initiatives. take a very, very, narrow view of the superficial costs while ignoring the plethora of indirect costs at all levels, disregard public opinion & actual market demand, then mandate it through the force of government and subsidize it when it flops. everybody happy now!?
I'm just wondering what we'll use if/when hyperinflation occurs. Will we have a $10,000 bill or a $10,000 coin? We'll need something to pay the grocery bill. Who wants to carry around an enormous wad of cash or a big bag of coins?
"Yank all the paper dollars and replace them with coins and everyone would adapt in a huge hurry."
Yeah! ram it down the public's throat whether we want it or not! Whether it runs up costs for businesses or not! that's the American way!
You would just carry that amount of money in a different denomination. Say $10 bills.
Who have they indicated will be on the front of it… and will it still state 'In God We Trust"
There in lies the problem. Not so much the market, as they would always go with what holds value the best even if the change is a bit hard at times. But the mention of a new fiat currency and thus repeating the same problem as that new currency is about just as worthless. To make it worse is the coalition of governments around the world forcing a new currency, it would just be like Europe with the Euro, and we see that collapse already happening now.
I thought that we were all going to be transitioned to the electronic "EBT" card… Government issued debit cards or under the skin RF chips.
I'm sure that's going to work well. Allowing competing currencies isn't the answer. Fiscal responsibility by the Federal Government and Federal Reserve is the answer. I've been setting up and running financial systems for 2 decades and can attest to the additional cost to every business that has to deal with multiple currencies.
Competition of this kind would be detrimental, the same as competition in language. Paul has ideas with which I agree, but this isn't one of them.
The only problem with dollar coins, as they are now, is that they are purposely made from metals that don't have much inherent value. Check the metal value of a nickel vs the metal value of the newer dollar coins at http://www.coinflation.com/ and it may surprise you…or maybe not if you've been reading here a while.
That's the kind of investment that the Federal government loves! If you could just find a way to equate this with "Green Energy" the Administration would give you $500 million immediately.
BTW: That happens to have been the Solyndra business model! I'm not sh!tting you.
If it's a pre-1982 penny, okay. If it's a zinc penny, you need to pay me four of them for my thoughts…
The Looney was actually named after the loon that is on it. It became Looney so that it would rhyme with Mulroney (The Conservative lunatic who introduced it).
It wasn't very popular at first but has since become accepted. Although it is a bit of extra weight to carry around there are some convienient aspects such as using them in vending machines and such. You usually spend them before too many of them accumulate in your pocket. Most of the money you carry around tends to be in larger denomination bills.
John Maynard Keynes?
There would be no laws forcing businesses to accept certain currencies, though. That's the difference with what we have now. Businesses could accept whatever they choose, so they could determine how much complexity they want to deal with. Some might only deal in one currency, thereby eliminating complexity altogether.
"Fiscal responsibility by the Federal Government and Federal Reserve is the answer."
It would be nice to live in a world in which governments keep the best interests of the people in mind, but we don't live in that world. In light of that fact, it makes little sense to trust bureaucrats with the ability to manage and manipulate something as vital to our economy as the money supply.
It wasn't very popular when first introduced in Canada but has since become accepted.
The worries about the extra weight and strain on pockets is unfounded. You usually spend them before too many of them accumulate in your pocket. Most of the money you carry around tends to be in larger denomination bills.
There'd probably be a big picture of Che, and it will state "In Government We Trust."
i think the main reason for the dislike of the coin, is the design. when i was in england, they use a one pound coin, and it was easy to spot. the pound coin was much thicker then all the other coins, so it was easy to spot. but the current dollar coins are very difficult to easily spot from your pocket. so while i agree a dollar coin would work, just not the dollar coins they wasted billions on already.
I'm not sure people would accept any of those in exchange for goods. My guess is unless it has some intrinsic value (old silver coins, nickel-composition coins, or copper pennies) people will laugh in your face if you offer them green paper or zinc/stainless steel coins, regardless of the numbers printed/minted on them. I figure if hyperinflation hits (if you think that's nonsense-just think back three years and ask yourself how many things have come to pass that were unthinkable back then) but if hyperinflation hits, I expect to be bartering a lot. Thank goodness I have chickens and a garden.
Sad but probably close to the truth.
I was in the UK when the £1 coin was introduced. The public hated it.
gb, we should strive to throw out the bureaucrats in order to improve our world.
Why throw out something that works because someone misuses it? By that argument we should throw out the automobile because some people won't drive the speed limit. We should throw out the English language an every person should determine what language they'll accept.
The reality is that our society benefits when all play by the same rules. Enforcement of laws and standards are a legitimate function of the federal government. Eliminating laws and standards because our elected representatives refuse to adhere to our wishes is irresponsible. It's akin to saying you won't enforce a Johnny's curfew because Johnny just won't listen. The solution isn't to remove the curfew, the solution is to hold Johnny to account.
Not trying to piss you off here or even argue with you. The reality is this will cost our businesses hundreds of billions of <insert monetary unit> to comply. If that's something you agree with then agreeing with Mr. Paul on this is the right way to go. I just don't think it's necessary to throw out a founding principal (the fathers thought a single currency was important ) because politicians and voters won't act with responsibility.
I work for a bank as a teller and the dollar coins just sit around nobody wants them. And the people that do either are just collecting them because of the presidential ones or use them as part of a kids party
Just pick one… paper or coin! Stop producing BOTH!
Uncle Sam knows best…LOL! How retarded can they be? This is another case of somebody wanting to leave their mark on society. Another example of idiots in power waisting our tax dollars. STOP IT! There is NO good reason for mandating a dollar coin EVER.
IT'S TIME FOR A NEW LAW THAT YOU MUST REMOVE 3 OLD LAWS IF YOU WANT TO ADD A NEW ONE.
Having just got back from Europe, where the smallest note is a five-Euro and 1s and 2s are coins, I can tell you it sucks. Your relatively serious money becomes indistinguishable from pocket change.
I don't disagree with much of what you said, but I have to point out that the Founders also called for only gold and silver to be used. Is that what we have today? Of course not. I'd have no problem returning to such a system because it would do what the Founders had intended to do: It would limit government.
Remember that the Founders employed fiat paper currency during the Revolution and dealt with horrendous inflation and everything that goes along with it. They took that lesson and applied it to the Constitution. In my opinion, they were smart to want to limit the government's control over currency by making the system commodity-based.
The Federal Reserve has no such limitations. It can inflate and deflate at will. All paper currencies come with an expiration date, and if we continue the current trend, ours will expire sooner rather than later. I don't think we should be stuck with it simply because we're waiting for the "right people" to be in charge. Instead of inviting chaos, I'd prefer the people have other options for when that occurs.
Its fine to experiment and try things, legislatively speaking. But as a part of this freedom, some responsibility must also be exercised. The responsible thing here is to recognize that we've tried this experiment and the results blow. Give up on it already.
This is just like Socialism. It's been tried many times before and has never worked. What makes these elected idiots think that the next time will be any different result? It's classic insanity!
The dollar coin represents wealth.
The federal reserve note, the dollar bill, represents debt.
Which do you want in your pocket? Debt or wealth?
Time to choose, America.
Now we're agreeing! The currency isn't the problem, it's the progressives who misused it for their own ends that are the real issue.
I'd fully support a return to the metal standard. A currency MUST be backed by something of value. Words are wind, tangible assets are not.
And we do have other options. If push comes to shove the barter system will return. I'd rather we reverse course prior to that but it is the ultimate fallback.
Lots of dumba$$ protestors will starve if that ever comes to pass, cause they'll not benefit from my hunting and or farming.
Someone elected some real brainiacs to represent them. Sounds like those three just skipped right over the cost analysis benefit. Ummm, duh.
Ron Paul again?
Yeah — and what about strippers — how are we supposed to tip the strippers?
I was there too, and all the Britts I knew loved them.
I need you to explain that logic, since I don't see how the coin equals wealth when it only worth five cents (aside from what the Federal Government claims it's worth). If there is nothing backing the money but debt, it doesn't matter whether it's printed or minted. Put a dollar's worth of silver in it, and I will gladly use it.
Yep, government wealth redistribution in a barter system would really drive home the argument that it's theft of property. Maybe that's what we need so people on the Left finally understand our point.
Really?…………Ever been at a store and handed the cashier a $10 bill then been given seven or eight $1 bills as change because they where low on fives? Do that a couple times in a day and you'll need a friggin' forklift to carry your money…………It won't work………
Thank you for a common sense rebuttal.
Making the dollar as we know it actually WORK is a whole lot less dangerous than reintroducing the angst that the colonies of early America already went through.
As I said on another thread, it wouldn't work.
First, never mind merchants having to store bags of dollar coins, they would have to check regular exchange rates, and alter prices to match. If they didn't, they would lose on every transaction.
Second, commodities markets are volatile in the way most currency markets are not. The functional inflation would be through the roof.
Those two together would mean basic store prices would make prices for basic staple change the way gas prices change. If you think people are angry consumers now just see how they like that.
Third, if they simply refused to accept any but a particular currency, the consumer would have to convert his currency for every purchase he wanted to make, losing on the moneychanging fee.
Fourth, with the current bullion values a $1 gold coin would be something like half a gram. Or a 1 ounce gold coin would be a $1,000 coin. Neither is particularly functional, and silver would not be much better for pocket change.
None of that is functional.
Which is the problem with commodity currency.
Either you foribly paralyze the market to prevent speculator caused inflation and deflation, or your currency changes relative value every minute the commodity trading markets are open.
There is no other option.
There are legal tender gold and silver coins right now. You would be a fool to use them at their legal tender face value.
If we are to get rid of fiat money this pretty much has to happen anyhow. Consider this- Loose the Fed and restore sound money. Ok then you get back to something like 1912 dollar values. So a gallon of milk costs about 25cents and a gallon of gas is a dime. No worries about duffel bags for coins then.
Granted a high income would be anything over $50k, but who cares when cars are $800 and a nice house sells new for $15k? Check prices before the Fed was created in 1913 and compare to today. My numbers are not unrealistic.
Excellent point. It reminds me of the folks in Pres. Jacksons day who HAD to carry anything under twenty dollars in coin. They weren't a happy lot, jangling down the street.
"Bibliotheca sibi" is what they`d print on it too.
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?oe=utf-8&...
That is not correct.
The Constitution specifies that the States may not make anything but gold or silver a legal tender; it places no such restriction on the Federal Government.
Yes, that is because of the massive inflation caused by the state issued paper currencies.
What is missing in that is what the function of that paper currency was, what the function of general paper currency was, and what the function of current paper currency is.
Those State issues were bonds. Their value collapsed because they turned into junk bonds – nobody expected them to be repaid. That is what can happen to bonds, and has nothing to do with paper currency per se.
Paper currency in the West originally was privately issued debt receipts. Banks would issue the paper money, "guaranteed" by their deposits, in order to make transportation easier, and to increase the money supply and economic activity via fractional reserve banking practices. Again, they were effectively debt instruments, and their success remained tied to the strength of the bank that issued them.
Current paper currency is a pseudo-debt instrument of the government. As a legal tender, it is based on the premise that at some point or other you will owe the government a debt and need that particular currency to redeem the debt. If you think people will owe the government the $8B or so dollars in circulation and however many $B in equity then the dollar is valuable. If you think people will never owe the government that much then the dollar is not valuable. That is how the "full faith and credit" element affects it. As long as the government endures, people will owe it debts, and the government only obligates itself to accept dollars as payment.
Look at the currency in that context, and the perceived value changes dramatically.
I guess I do not see the point of a coin dollar unless the dollar is backed by something. It would seem to me that the government could just as easily devalue our fiat currency through the manufacturing of more coins as they do paper dollars now.
Now, if the currency was actually backed by something – gold and silver has historically been the best and most widely used sound money – then coins would be a good idea. With Bernanke and the Fed securely in control (and politicians from both parties willing to defend them), it doesn't matter if our fiats are in coin or paper dollars.
As another factor:
The current dollar coins with the Presidential portraits are expected to be collectible.
That means a certain percentage are constantly being removed from circulation, and special sets are being sold at premiums.
This is the same as with the State/Territory quarters, but at four times the base value.
That creates both a cash cow for the government as well as a hoarding effect on the money supply.
Neither functions particularly well in the long run for the economy.
Our money does not even operate in a world of common sense.
(face/palm)
Except of course there is no reason to expect such a massive deflation just because of a switch to bullion currency.
To achieve that result you would have to forcibly revalue the currency as well as convert it, switching a current dollar for a "new" dime or penny or what not.
re: "Do that a couple times in a day and you'll need a friggin' forklift to carry your money…………It won't work…"
It's not a problem because in the second store you wouldn't give the cashier a $10 bill for a $2 purchase. You would use the dollar coins that the first store gave you.
We've had one and two dollar coins in Canada for several years now and it's not a problem.
Whenever I am slipped one of these "joke" coins, I immediately pawn it off somewhere or give it back to whoever gave it to me.
I truly detest them, as they are so much like quarters in size.. What's wrong with semi-worthless paper?
Ann
They can sink with the post office..
Well. A Breitbart column that supports the way the Government is doing something?. I am not buying this one. Having seen the use of 'larger-than-a-quarter' coin use in other countries and being an accountant by profession, I can tell you it 'ain't that big a thang'. The reason we in the USA don't like dollar coins is that we have an alternative, we are used to it and do not want to change, plain and simple. That alternative is more expensive. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous. It is true that dollar coins cost more to produce. It is also true that dollar coins will last literally decades while dollar bills wear out within a couple of years. This makes the bill much more expensive for the taxpayer because you have to keep making them. Much more expensive. The goal here is to reign in government spending people. (See Pt 2)
(Pt 2) – This is a slam dunk. It is true that vending machines will have to have their coin mechanisms changed out and that is definitely an extra cost. But it is a one-time cost. Once changed, it is done. Having to deal with dollar coins without having to deal with dollar bills just means that the dollar slot in the cash register will have coins in it instead of paper bills. Now, as far as getting dollar coins from the bank, I can and have walked into my bank and 'Ordered' two rolls of Susan B's, plunked down 2 twenties and a ten and walked out in about 4 minutes. "Minimum of 2000"? Not so. (See Pt 3)
(Pt 3) – Other countries have these single unit coins and do just fine thank you. The one dollar bill is an expensive luxury that the US Government can no longer afford. Please, we on the right should not be playing the leftist and rather juvenile game of "We like it this way, we have always done it this way and we don't want to change. So There". Those who complain that dollar coins get lost in the change pile should, perhaps, suck it up and remember that we on the Right are the party of grown-ups, pay a little better attention and change their habits when it comes to the management of 'change'. Enact dollar coins only, and people will change, kicking and screaming all the way, and we, the taxpayers, will save money. Period. It is not my responsibility as a tax payer to subsidize your inattentiveness when it comes to ‘cash’ management.
Freedom means free, not easy.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have Power…To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.
If Congress was granted the power to coin money, and the states were denied the power to coin money and told to accept nothing but gold or silver coin for payment of debts, that means nothing but gold and silver coin were intended to serve as money. "Coining" money at the time of our founding meant to use metal as currency. To pretend it meant anything other than that is disingenuous. If, as you state, the Constitution permits the Congress to issue paper currency — bills of credit — it also denies the states the ability to accept that paper currency as payment for debts. Do you really think that's what the founders intended?
The gold standard evolved over thousands of years specifically because the market knew the supply was limited. The fluctuation in gold prices we see today is the result of fiat currencies increasing or decreasing in relative value; it is not the result of gold flooding the market and then being withdrawn from the market. Once governments learned of the joys of fractional reserve banking (read: counterfeiting), they wanted in on the game that unscrupulous bankers were playing.
That's why we have paper currency. That's why we had paper currency during the Revolution: It was a simple way to finance an expensive war. But as a result of the rampant inflation, the founders sought to limit our currency only to gold and silver coin.
It really is no more complicated than saying governments like paper currency because they can create new money at will without having to ask for an increase in taxes from the populace. This allows governments to grow at any rate they wish without the limits that a relatively fixed supply of money would impose. The new money that is created to pay for government expansion simply increases the supply of money in circulation, thereby driving up prices and reducing the value of savings.
Governments like paper currency because they can hide de facto tax increases from the citizens.
Aren't there bigger and better things Congress should be focusing on these days? Nobody WANTS a dollar coin. Everybody wants a JOB, healthcare and a reduced deficit. Once they get those three little issues solved, they should move onto less important ones. That said – to convert to a coin is wasteful. PS – Did I mention that nobody wants the coin??
Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your viewpoint) what you say cannot be argued. But there's been a forced devalue over the last 100 years so it might not be an all bad idea. <DIV style=”FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: bookman old style, new york, times, serif”> <DIV style=”FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif”> <DIV></DIV>
Is this Barney Frank's way of forcing 'man purses' on the masses?
How Dumb are they 1 Dollar coins! How stupid we all ready have Quarters in their place! snark
No it doesn't.
You are engaging in the fallacy of the excluded middle.
The intent was that all issues of currency would be from the Federal government only, and not to have 13, now 50, competing State currencies,.
That's it.
Congress is not in any way prohibited from making anything other than gold and silver a legal tender, while still being empowered to borrow money and the like. Unless you are presuming the Founders were so shortsighted as to not realize that, there is no way to assert they intended to restrict currency to bullion only.
The market always knew that the supply of gold was not limited. They knew more was constantly being mined, more was available by gaining it from other nations, and that the content of coins could be altered.
Governments like currency because it projects the power of the government. That they can manipulate the supply and content merely enhances that power.
Then limited the fees on debit cards so banks will have to charge more for them.
They just want to force us into a pol pot style of life.
All this is just a smoke screen diversion to distract us from the fact our money is useless and we don't have any jobs left.
There is a good reason it is "illegal" to melt down coins……
Ask yourself, and then go check, does a coin say federal reserve note on it?
The Congress is tasked with determining the value of coin, while the federal reserve, which is as federal as federal express, determines, secretly, what its "notes" are "worth". It is a choice to leave the wealth representing coin sit and to trade in the reserve's debt representing notes.
With paper, all you have is paper, besides the trust you have in it. With coin, there is the same trust, or lack of it for sure, but so too is there intrinsic value of the metal itself.
Why is it coins don't have serial numbers but reserve notes do? They are both a dollar, right? Hardly.
One is a dollar and one is a dollar bill. Like I said, one represents wealth while the other represents debt.
You can own a coin. You can never own reserve notes, you can only borrow them.
What do you get in the mail once a month for electricity? A bill. When you borrow money to buy a house, when you buy a mortgage, what do you do? You sign a note representing debt.
Inflating the numbers with monetary policy is like an insurance policy for the FED too keeps its stranglehold on us all. Notice the complaints about carrying so much coin? That is exactly what the money changers, the prosperity killers, the controllers and usurpers of Liberty want to hear. It is music to their ears.
One more angle to pique your interest. Coins remain, while reserve notes are regularly destroyed – and in secret to boot. People holler about printing presses running overtime. Heck, they run 24/7 anyway. The REAL key is in how many notes are being destroyed, or not. And that right there is THE most closely guarded secret that exists.
Using coins is how we can beat the Fed, in spite of politicians who want to keep us under the Fed's thumb. Like I said, it is a choice.
America would be well served to start trading in wealth, instead of debt.
Off topic, but I'm ever so pissed when I get your coins in my change. How does it get get in the coke machine if the same coke machine doesn't accept them? Sometimes I wonder if the coke machine stockers put them in to mess with people. It probably happens to you more than to me, but the things work their way all the way to Texas.
Coggy, I had to look all over to find your comment. I see no body else even bothered to mark you down yet.
Irrelevant and ignored, you just be so discouraged….
You are severely miscontruing the functions.
It is illegal to melt down coins for their bullion because the market may have adjusted the value of the bullion away from that of the minted coin, and that would have a detrimental effect on the economy.
If the bullion is worth more than the coin, then the government takes a loss each time someone melts a coin and resells it to the government.
If the bullion is worth less than the coin, then the government takes a loss each time someone mines new bullion and sells it to the government for new coins.
Either way, ultimately a dollar coin is not worth a dollar.
It is "worth" whatever the market decides the bullion is worth today, and how that valuation affects the amount of bullion diverted from currency to other uses.
The government can, by fiat, declare that a particular amount of a particular commodity is "a dollar", but that is an artificial valuation that is ultimately as successful as any other government imposed price fixing.
I'm with Danyodan. I have been in those other countries and I can't understand why we wouldn't agree to replace a bill , that lasts an average of 18 months, with a coin that last @ 40 years. We just are USED to a dollar bill. Lose the bill…bring on the presidential coins (no fan of the Sacajawea PC coin). It's a fairly painless way to save millions a year…why shouldn't the US Mint lead the way?
"Congress is not in any way prohibited from making anything other than gold and silver a legal tender, while still being empowered to borrow money and the like."
But why would the Constitution grant the federal government the power to borrow money if it could simply create it at any time? There would be no reason to give Congress that authority if it could simply run a printing press. The answer is that the currency was supposed to be limited to exactly what was spelled out in the Constitution. Nothing more. If additional money was needed, it would have to be borrowed — not simply printed.
"The market always knew that the supply of gold was not limited. They knew more was constantly being mined, more was available by gaining it from other nations, and that the content of coins could be altered."
I mean limited in the sense that the supply can not be radically altered within a short period of time the way it can be with a paper currency. There are ways the supply of gold can be increased, but not without a great deal of effort. Increasing the supply of paper currency involves nothing more than turning on a printing press (or, more accurately for today, typing a few keystrokes on a computer).
"Governments like currency because it projects the power of the government. That they can manipulate the supply and content merely enhances that power."
It should, therefore, not be a surprise that the Founders did in fact mean to limit the government's ability to manipulate the supply and content. Allowing paper currency flies in the face of all their declarations against the dangers of centralized power.
Now that's funny. Good one.
They'd cost a lot more than 32 cents to make, too.
Because the supply of current government funds may not be sufficient for immediate expenditures.
Do not confuse the money supply with the public purse!
The two are not identical, and great damage has been done to economies and currencies by governments that treat the two as identical.
And, as it goes, by printing money the government IS borrowing money. Or rather asserting that money will be owed to it. A bit technical, but highly relevant.
The supply of gold and silver CAN be radically altered within a short period of time. Look at the California Gold Rush. Even before it was minted, gold nuggets and dust sent prices soaring.
Look at the destabilization of Hapsburg Spain. Spain went bankrupt AFTER opening the gold and silver mines of South America. Why? Between the Crown's share and people having coin minted, expenditures soared, borrowing soared, and the money supply soared causing inflation, and suddenly a government wallowing in gold and silver was defaulting on its loans.
"Effort" in warping the money supply is a very relative term.
Except of course the Founders explicitly permitted the government to manipulate the supply and content. They didn't say what the coins minted had to be, they just said Congress has the power and sets the rules for it. They also granted Congress the power to set the regulations for the militia and army. Does that mean the Founders didn't intend that Congress could "manipulate" the number, size, and types of battallions raised? The Air Force would be in a lot of trouble if that were the case!
I'll add a few more issues. Most vending machines don't accept dollar coins, just papers. Think about the massive cost to retool every soda machine in the country so it can accept dollar coins. Also, the only real effect of this is probably going to be to drive even MORE people to using debit/credit cards for all purchases. A few quarters is already heavy. I don't want a pocket full of dollar coins wearing holes in my pockets.
Thanks Vox. Nice to know that.
It will certainly boost the sale of coin purses, since I had to carry one of those in Japan because of the 100 yen (~$1) and 500 ($5) yen coins. Of course Japan also had a problem with counterfeit 500 yen coin and metal slugs can be easier to counterfeit than sophisticated paper currency.
Again with the dollar coin??!! What the heck is wrong with these people? It didn't work the first time and it ain't gonna work now. But better to keep people employed making it, I guess. Paying them OUR hard-earned money, of course.
I would say 95% of all vending machines accept dollar coins. I exclusively carry dollar coins, and I have yet to meet one that doesn't accept my coin. Why? The vending machine companies are the largest backers of dollar coins.
Paper bills hurt vending machine companies. Bills are torn, worn and dirty and get stuck in the expensive feeders, thus breaking them. On top of that people usually end up vandalizing the machine when their dollar bill isn't accepted.
As for MORE people using debit/credit cards? I'm sorry, but we're the only major currency on the face of this planet to still use low denomination bills. The Japanese, Canadians, Europeans, Australian and British all switched years ago. In fact, most of them are now getting rid of paper currency all together in favor of recyclable plastic bills.
Two reasons.
(1) People are uninformed.
(2) People = Habits = Continue to make the same stupid mistakes, over and over again.
Our currency is wasteful and outdated. Pennies are worthless, nickles cost 10c to make and paper dollars are just plain worthless. Dollar bills are fragile, they are germ ridden, they cost more (10c for 2 year circulation, vs 32c for 30 year circulation) and billions of shredded notes are thrown into landfills years.
Sorry, but NOT getting rid of the dollar bill is the mistake. What Randy forgets is "durability".
Dollar bills are dirty (germ ridden), fragile and wasteful. They last approx. 2 years and cost 10 cents to make.
Dollar coins, however, are durable. They last 30 years in circulation and cost 32 cents to make.
In the long run, sticking to dollar bills will cost us $1.50 = 10c * 30yrs/2yrs
Getting rid of the dollar bill, would SAVE $1.18 = $1.50 – 32c
The dollar coin saves money. NOT getting rid of the dollar bill would get you thrown in jail.
Durability.
10c per bill, replaced every 2 years, then thrown in a landfill.
32c per coin, replace every 30 years, then melted down and reminted.
$1.50 for 30 years > $0.32 for 30 years
You've got to think it through, and not take it at face value!
You must be logged in to post a comment.