PDA

View Full Version : Canada- bye, bye penny



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2012-Mar-30, 11:11 AM
My country has finally decided to get rid of the penny beginning this fall. This will be a boon for charity. Something tells me that this coin will continue to show up in the proof and specimen sets though. Gotta love the RCM for the junk that they produce these days. Ps. this was part of our Nation's budget yesterday.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2012-Mar-30, 11:17 AM
I know that I've made several posts on this subject before and tried searching them so as not create another one...couldn't find them...but as soon as I posted "this" thread...bam there they are...penny for you thoughts?

The Backroad Astronomer
2012-Mar-30, 11:31 AM
I'll miss the penny, I have rolled many pennies over the years.

Solfe
2012-Mar-30, 12:04 PM
I am not sure how I feel about that. I live in Buffalo, NY and it is very common to have Canadian pennies. No one seems to distinguish between US and Canadian pennies, perhaps this is common in all border towns?

One time I took a trip to Florida and tried to use a Canadian penny. The cashier gave me a very nasty look and passed 3 Canadian pennies back to me with the words "We don't accept FOREIGN currency". I gave her a nickel and tried to make light of it but she was actually very angry, as if she thought I was a con-artist or something.

DonM435
2012-Mar-30, 12:32 PM
Getting rid of the penny makes excellent sense. Pennies are just clutter and debris: they aren't worth picking up. (Their "greatest" value may be as weights or shims or such, but that's probably illegal.)

I'd also replace the $5 and $1 with coins, and just maintain 50c and 10c pieces.

Nowhere Man
2012-Mar-30, 01:52 PM
I am not sure how I feel about that. I live in Buffalo, NY and it is very common to have Canadian pennies. No one seems to distinguish between US and Canadian pennies, perhaps this is common in all border towns?
Same thing here in SE Michigan. Not only pennies, but the occasional nickel, dime, and quarter. I always sort them out.

Fred

Chuck
2012-Mar-30, 02:03 PM
The new saying will be "A nickel for five of your thoughts."

Trebuchet
2012-Mar-30, 02:11 PM
Good for Canada, where they also got rid of $1 and $2 bills some years ago. Here in the US, we're in the throes of yet another failed attempt to replace the dollar bill with a coin. Failure was inevitable, of course, because they keep printing the bills.

Buttercup
2012-Mar-30, 03:16 PM
Good for Canada, where they also got rid of $1 and $2 bills some years ago. Here in the US, we're in the throes of yet another failed attempt to replace the dollar bill with a coin. Failure was inevitable, of course, because they keep printing the bills.

But coins are so heavy. :( And that weight adds up. And besides, the newest coin dollars look too much, at quick glance, like a quarter; they're not golden-colored enough. Remember the BIG dollar coins? Those stood out. But again -- heavy. :(

The Backroad Astronomer
2012-Mar-30, 03:21 PM
Almost eveyone one else one Earth uses a coin for 1 and 2 dollars or 1 or 2 euros, why do americans whine so much about the weight of the coin. It is not like the rest of use are super strong or something.

The Backroad Astronomer
2012-Mar-30, 03:32 PM
Ok whine might be too strong of a word but it is not that much weight.

Buttercup
2012-Mar-30, 03:50 PM
There's a difference between carrying a handful of coins in one's back pocket (men) versus a handful of coins within a purse carried over one's shoulder (women).

Trust me, the weight on the shoulder gets felt -- especially over the course of a day.

Moose
2012-Mar-30, 04:14 PM
I am not sure how I feel about that. I live in Buffalo, NY and it is very common to have Canadian pennies. No one seems to distinguish between US and Canadian pennies, perhaps this is common in all border towns?

Same with nickels, dimes, and quarters (unless there's a lot of them). Generally, they're treated at par in border towns. Border town stores (particularly restaurants) usually accept the other's currency, and they'll often post the day's exchange rate on little placards next to the register. Sometimes they'll exchange at par, even if the exchange is slightly unfavorable. Foreign business is business.

Buttercup
2012-Mar-30, 04:14 PM
...and we Americans also don't like the metric system. :p

Moose
2012-Mar-30, 04:19 PM
Heh. I've played the "metric time / 20 hour clock" prank on some of my US friends. :D

ToSeek
2012-Mar-30, 04:20 PM
Getting rid of the penny makes excellent sense. Pennies are just clutter and debris: they aren't worth picking up. (Their "greatest" value may be as weights or shims or such, but that's probably illegal.)

I'd also replace the $5 and $1 with coins, and just maintain 50c and 10c pieces.

I was in Portugal earlier this month using Euros, which took some getting used to because the smallest paper bill is E5 - the E1 and E2 are both coins. It took me a while to realize that it was not at all unreasonable to pay an E4.50 museum admission fee entirely in change - in fact, sometimes they all but insisted on it.

Jim
2012-Mar-30, 04:25 PM
Almost eveyone one else one Earth uses a coin for 1 and 2 dollars or 1 or 2 euros, why do americans whine so much about the weight of the coin. It is not like the rest of use are super strong or something.

Well, no, but Americans are super rich. Which means we carry way more dollar bills than you do dollar coins. After a while, even all those light weight bills can get heavy.

(Add link to Subway "fat wallet" commercial here.)

NEOWatcher
2012-Mar-30, 04:28 PM
There's a difference between carrying a handful of coins in one's back pocket (men) versus a handful of coins within a purse carried over one's shoulder (women).

Trust me, the weight on the shoulder gets felt -- especially over the course of a day.
And what is the total weight now, and how much is in there that doesn't need to be, and how long are you normally carrying it?
Some women are careful with thier purses, many aren't. Some have heavy purses even if they are empty.

Not to propogate the war of the sexes, but there are differences in how you handle it. I think we might have equal but different issues. I've had way too many coins in my pockets and it's not that pleasant. Not from the weight necessarily, but the way it moves around and "bulges" your pocket.

Right now I have...
2.5x5 = 5g
5.0x3 = 15g
2.27x4 = 9.1g
5.67x5 = 28.35g
67.45g... 2.4 ounces.
of coin in my pocket.
If I convert my dollar bills to coin I would have another...
(8.1-0.6)x2 = 7.5g (.26 ounces)

Compare that to the weight of a purse. Is it really that different?

SeanF
2012-Mar-30, 04:31 PM
There's a difference between carrying a handful of coins in one's back pocket (men) versus a handful of coins within a purse carried over one's shoulder (women).

Trust me, the weight on the shoulder gets felt -- especially over the course of a day.
Men carry coins in their back pockets? Who knew? :)

The problem with carrying coins for men is not so much the weight as the bulk. A few coins takes up much more pocket space than does the same number of bills.


Same with nickels, dimes, and quarters (unless there's a lot of them). Generally, they're treated at par in border towns. Border town stores (particularly restaurants) usually accept the other's currency, and they'll often post the day's exchange rate on little placards next to the register. Sometimes they'll exchange at par, even if the exchange is slightly unfavorable. Foreign business is business.
Doesn't even have to be a border town. I'm not even in a border state, and we get Canadian coins here occasionally. I've never had a store refuse to accept even a Canadian quarter. However, I've never had the opportunity to try with anything larger.


Well, no, but Americans are super rich. Which means we carry way more dollar bills than you do dollar coins. After a while, even all those light weight bills can get heavy.
Ha! :lol:

Buttercup
2012-Mar-30, 04:31 PM
NEOWatcher, I keep my purse as lightweight as possible; no more than maybe 10 ounces at any given time. That's particularly why I don't like a ton of coins in purse and get rid of them ASAP (which is another nuisance). Frankly I wish we had only bills to deal with.

NEOWatcher
2012-Mar-30, 04:56 PM
NEOWatcher, I keep my purse as lightweight as possible; no more than maybe 10 ounces at any given time.
Good for you. I've not met many women with that kind of self-control.

Chuck
2012-Mar-30, 05:38 PM
So I guess penny candy won't be making a comeback anytime soon.

NEOWatcher
2012-Mar-30, 05:45 PM
If penny candy costs 1c, then why are penny loafers so expensive?

Gillianren
2012-Mar-30, 05:57 PM
This will be a boon for charity.

How?

I am in favour of $1 coins and opposed to getting rid of the penny. It's a move that hits the poor hardest in a lot of ways that never seem to get considered when the subject is up for discussion. (And I carry a ton of stuff around--books, writing paper, craft projects--and don't object a few more ounces. In part because I seldom have enough money to make a difference!) It's worth noting that the current legislation under proposal in the US would solve the problem of the previous ones; it would eliminate the dollar bill from printing.

NEOWatcher
2012-Mar-30, 06:25 PM
Speaking of Canadian coins and penny candy. I just ran across this story.
Crash sends millions of Canadian coins, candy onto highway (http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/world/Copy_of_crash-sends-millions-of-canadian-coins-candy-onto-highway1333108079952)

I thought this was rather clever...

Crews used a crane with a giant magnet to pick up all the coins.
I didn't know loonies and toonies were attracted to magnets.

Trebuchet
2012-Mar-30, 06:45 PM
I wouldn't have thought they'd be magnetic either.

I'm in a border state and haven't been seeing much, if any, Canadian change. The exchange rate makes a huge difference. Right now, the Canadian and US dollars are pretty much at par. If they're not, people's attitudes will be very different. Some years ago when the Canadian dollar was only worth about 75 cents us we started seeing a lot of Canadian change. Merchants started refusing to accept it. Many of the same merchants were, of course, buying Canadian change at a discount and passing it off to their customers at face values. Eventually the banks cracked down.

Replacing the paper dollar makes good economic sense -- as long as you quit printing the paper. Dollar bills last only about six months, on average. Coin cost a little more to make but last ever so much longer. Unfortunately the US Congress lacks the courage to do what's needed.

NEOWatcher
2012-Mar-30, 06:54 PM
...Unfortunately the US Congress lacks the courage to do what's needed.
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing can always say "ooops, our printing plates broke".
Or the Federal Reserve can say "oops, I forgot to place this year's order".

On a related note of retiring bills, I've always wondered why old notes are kept so long in circulation. They add all these new security features, yet someone can just counterfeit the older ones and spend them.

Fazor
2012-Mar-30, 07:05 PM
Almost eveyone one else one Earth uses a coin for 1 and 2 dollars or 1 or 2 euros, why do americans whine so much about the weight of the coin. It is not like the rest of use are super strong or something.

I don't carry coins on me. Ever. Get change from something? If I am handed coin change it's either thrown in the tray in my car, or in my desk at work, or given to Tara. I have too much crap in my pockets as it is, and coins don't work in a traditional flat wallet.

That's why I oppose the dollar coin. Sure, I'd adjust. I'd just quit paying cash altogether. :-P

Solfe
2012-Mar-30, 08:59 PM
Speaking of Canadian coins and penny candy. I just ran across this story.
Crash sends millions of Canadian coins, candy onto highway (http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/world/Copy_of_crash-sends-millions-of-canadian-coins-candy-onto-highway1333108079952)

I thought this was rather clever...

I didn't know loonies and toonies were attracted to magnets.

That's weird, they are magnetic. I had no idea.

Ara Pacis
2012-Mar-30, 09:40 PM
On a related note of retiring bills, I've always wondered why old notes are kept so long in circulation. They add all these new security features, yet someone can just counterfeit the older ones and spend them.Maybe they're in circulation because they never stopped being in circulation. Certain banks send old/worn-out money to be destroyed (or laundered) when they get ahold of it, but it's possible that some bills never get to that exit point.

If the US gets rid of the penny, Illinois will secede from the union. Okay, maybe not, but getting rid of the coin that celebrates the "Land of Lincoln" has been less likely to go through while the Speaker of the House from (1999-2007) was an Illinoisan and then the next President (2009-) was also considered to be from Illinois. In other words, Penny-lovers have had effective veto power over the idea for 12 of the last 13 years.

As for singles ($1), people often carry enough of those to be caused inconvenience by a large coin, and a not smaller coin might be confused for a quarter or ye olde half-dollar. It's not just about the weight, it's about the size. I don't know if most guys put coins in their back pocket, I put it in my front pocket, and it can make sitting uncomfortable. Not to mention there's a strong Gentleman's Club lobby. And cash registers will need to be made larger to carry the same number of 1$ units of currency if x coins take up more space than x dollar bills.

publius
2012-Mar-30, 10:38 PM
Right now, there's over $1B of the $1 coins just piled up in Fed vaults. By law, the Mint makes them, and the Fed must buy them (credit Treasury's account with the value in digi-FRNs). They thus live on the asset side of the Fed's balance sheet, never going into circulation because no one wants them. (note that coin and FRNs are fundamentally different monetary entities. Coin is direct Treasury currency, while FRNs and the digital forms are Fed liabilities created against assets -- those assets can be the very Coin Treasury currency, of course).

Take a gander at the latest H.4.1:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/current/h41.htm

Go to Table 8, and note the Coin item. It is now $2.3B total. Over $1B of that is just the dollar coins that will never be used.

Ara Pacis
2012-Mar-30, 11:39 PM
Right now, there's over $1B of the $1 coins just piled up in Fed vaults. By law, the Mint makes them, and the Fed must buy them (credit Treasury's account with the value in digi-FRNs). They thus live on the asset side of the Fed's balance sheet, never going into circulation because no one wants them. (note that coin and FRNs are fundamentally different monetary entities. Coin is direct Treasury currency, while FRNs and the digital forms are Fed liabilities created against assets -- those assets can be the very Coin Treasury currency, of course).

Take a gander at the latest H.4.1:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/current/h41.htm

Go to Table 8, and note the Coin item. It is now $2.3B total. Over $1B of that is just the dollar coins that will never be used.

And that reminds me of another possible issue. According to one economic blogger, a potential downfall of the world economy might be a run on US currency due to the need to physically ship large amounts of currency to foreign banks. I don't recall the specifics, but it's easier to create large amounts of paper money quickly than coin money. Perhaps they ship larger notes than $1, but since the 1$ is a very common note, perhaps it keeps the presses running and creates an economy of scale to keep the operation running smoothly. On the other hand, maybe that production time is better spent making $20 and $100 bills to fulfill the need mentioned above.

publius
2012-Mar-31, 12:26 AM
Ara,

PM me the link to that blog -- I'd like to read the theory. That would require a real physical run on FRNs, people demanding to pull physical cash out. The banks themselves, including the foreign just deal in digi-dollars anyway and would have no need or desire to convert their digital reserves which exist in the Fed's computers to physical FRNs beyond what they need to sastify customer desires. All of the QEing was in digital form, of course.

As it is now, the Fed likes to maintain about $200B in cash cushion -- as of the last H.4.1 it was $177B -- in case there was such a physical run. And we make Helicopter jokes, but that's indeed how they would get that cash cushion out if need be, by helicopter, which they've done a few times in the past when there was a physical run on a bank.

The way it works is that by volume, the $1 bill takes up the most "space", but by value, it's the $100 bill. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints around half a billion in total value *per day*, with the brunt of volume being $1s. 95% of that is pure turnover, replacing worn out bills, with the remainder being growth in the physical money supply required.

Here's the Fed page on FRNs outstanding, which goes into detail:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/coin_data.htm

It's got graphs, but you can click and the tables. Note that by value, $100s are the biggest chunk, followed by $20s, but by volume, it's $1s. The fraction of each outstanding does not translate into the daily printing fraction because of different lifetimes. The $1s consume a larger fraction of the replacement turnover than the fraction outstanding.

For 2011, the volume figure was a total of 31.3B notes outstanding, with 10B $1s. So $1s make up nearly a third of the volume of bills in circulation, but are a tiny fraction of the total value in circulation, currency at $1.05T (not counting the $177B cushion).

Jim
2012-Mar-31, 06:24 PM
... Not to mention there's a strong Gentleman's Club lobby. ...

I hadn't considered that. A switch away from $1 bills could lead to a drastic redesign of the G-string.

Nowhere Man
2012-Mar-31, 08:02 PM
Dang, you're right. I wonder how they've handled it at the "Windsor Ballet?" Of course, Canada and the Eurozone countries have already faced this problem.

Fred

Chuck
2012-Mar-31, 08:22 PM
The Clubs could sell house money that the customers could buy and the dancers could turn in later for larger bills or direct deposit.

publius
2012-Mar-31, 08:35 PM
Wait a minute. The "exotic performers" do have a natural coin slot, no? But holding capacity is limited, I'm sure, and they'd need to rig something.

Gillianren
2012-Mar-31, 10:00 PM
At faire, we do what we call "ye olde medieval bodice-tuck." Bills stay a whole lot better than coins do. I guess you could sew pouches of some sort onto a costume?

SeanF
2012-Apr-01, 02:51 AM
At faire, we do what we call "ye olde medieval bodice-tuck."
It's a treasure chest!




(Thank you folks, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress.)

Inclusa
2012-Apr-01, 03:43 AM
These coins are mostly for dollar stores and parking.

DonM435
2012-Apr-01, 03:19 PM
That's weird, they are magnetic. I had no idea.

I remember that vending machines in Detroit used magnets to catch Canadian coins. As these were worth less than the US counterparts (at least when I was there), it added up to a significant loss to accept these at par. (On a visit to Windsor, I bought a Canadian dollar as a souvenir, and they gave me a nickel back on the deal. (Can't recall whether it was a U.S. or Canadian nickel. If the latter, maybe I had to give back a penny, ad infinitum.)

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-01, 04:23 PM
Canadian nickels used to be magnetic because they were actually made of that metal. That made them more intrinsically valuable than US nickels, which have always been mostly copper.

Now I'm going to see if I've still got my stash of Canadian coins and try out the magnetism.

Jim
2012-Apr-01, 08:55 PM
(Thank you folks, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress.)

Well, if she has a bodice full of $1 coins, that shouldn't be too hard. Just a gentle push and she'll go right over.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-02, 03:09 PM
Maybe they're in circulation because they never stopped being in circulation.
Obviously.
What I was getting at was that there is no system in place to retire* the circulation of a particular design.


As for singles ($1), people often carry enough of those to be caused inconvenience by a large coin, and a not smaller coin might be confused for a quarter or ye olde half-dollar.
I wonder what it was like decades ago when the $1 bill bought more. I'm sure there was plenty of people with lots of coins because things were bought in coin values.

Does anyone here remember if those big dollars and half dollars were common in transactions? I got those a lot as a kid (kids get impressed at those kinds of things), but don't know how readily they were circulated.


Not to mention there's a strong Gentleman's Club lobby.
I guess that's a stronger lobby than the dancer's lobby. I'm sure they would love to get 5's now. After all, how long ago were they getting 1's that are worth today's 5's?


And cash registers will need to be made larger to carry the same number of 1$ units of currency if x coins take up more space than x dollar bills.
Use the penny slot.
Actually; if you retire the bill, you have a nice sized slot. Just get rid of that springy hold down thing.


*by retire, I mean an actual end point rather than an eventual retire by attrition only.

SeanF
2012-Apr-02, 04:02 PM
*by retire, I mean an actual end point rather than an eventual retire by attrition only.
So, you want a deadline at which stores will no longer accept the older bills, and anybody who still has older bills has just lost the value of that money?

Should they just print bills with an expiration date on them? :)

Fazor
2012-Apr-02, 05:12 PM
Obviously.
I wonder what it was like decades ago when the $1 bill bought more. I'm sure there was plenty of people with lots of coins because things were bought in coin values.

In Columbus, I see 50-cent pieces a ton still. Makes sense; with parking (garages, meters, etc.) and pub transit, a lot more coin change used. I used to get dollar-coins from the vending machine at the parking garage as well. Probably easier to dispense. They didn't bother me then, because I just kept them in my car and was able to use them the next day when I needed to pay for parking.

Here in the land of corn and cattle, I *never* see fifty-cent pieces or dollar coins. So obviously, higher-value coinage is a big-city thing, and the push to go to it is just them fancy oil-slicked-hair city types trying to impose their will on us simple country folk! :)

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-02, 05:27 PM
So, you want a deadline at which stores will no longer accept the older bills, and anybody who still has older bills has just lost the value of that money?
I don't think any solution would be without its issues, but in a way yes. Maybe there could be some requirement beforehand that requires certain businesses and institutions to stop handing them out for a while which would greatly reduce the amount in circulation (and to prevent someone getting "stuck" with some as they get phased out).



Should they just print bills with an expiration date on them? :)
That would help. Unfortunately, we would have to have a regular schedule of updates since we wouldn't know when they expire.

Of course, Canada is a good test study since they've had the loony for quite some time now. How did they do it? Are dollar bills still acceptable currency there?

Taeolas
2012-Apr-02, 05:28 PM
I wonder if part of the resistance to dropping the US 1$ bill is psychological. Your bills all look very similar en masse, so someone can have a wad of 1$ bills and make it look more impressive than it really is. Similarly, unless you keep your money organized, I know when I'm in the states, I tend to pay with the first bills I find, often leaving me with a pile of 1's I need to sort out after the fact to figure out how much I have.

Up here, I prefer the 1$ and 2$ coins (2$ coin especially because it cuts down the number of Loonies I get back). Paying a 75cent item with a 5$ bill gets me back 3 coins: 2 toonies and a quarter; whereas if you didn't have the 2$ coin you'd get 5 coins back. But anyways, the Loonie and Toonie I find are nice especially because they are large enough you can blindly find them easier than the rest of the coins; Reach into your pocket and you can pluck them out pretty easily. That, and the weight factor does make me pay with them before bills when I can, while saving my bills as much as possible.

Oh and I'm glad we're finally ditching the penny. It's day is long past, and even the nickle's days are numbered.

Frankly, though it wouldn't happen, I wouldn't mind too much if we just devalued the loonie by 10%. So 1 penny then would be worth 10 cents now; (Knock a 0 off of all money values in cents basically; a 3.99$ comic book would be worth 39cents; but a 42,000$ annual income becomes 4200$ annual income). It would knock us too far out of synch with the Greenback however, and people would throw a fit regardless.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-02, 06:12 PM
Does anyone here remember if those big dollars and half dollars were common in transactions? I got those a lot as a kid (kids get impressed at those kinds of things), but don't know how readily they were circulated.

I'm a little older than many on this board and remember both in common circulation in my youth. Made of actual silver, at that. I grew up in Montana and the old silver dollars were in common circulation into at least the late 1950's. Then the treasury released a bunch of them back in DC and they were immediately snapped up by folks who knew they were worth more than $1 in silver value. That made the news in MT and they disappeared from circulation literally overnight.



I guess that's a stronger lobby than the dancer's lobby. I'm sure they would love to get 5's now. After all, how long ago were they getting 1's that are worth today's 5's? That occurred to me as well.



Use the penny slot.
Actually; if you retire the bill, you have a nice sized slot. Just get rid of that springy hold down thing.

Use the half dollar slot, you really shouldn't need that any more either. For an interim, until we get our own toonie, put $2 bills in the dollar bill slot.

The Washington State Ferry system pretty routinely passes out both half-dollars and $2 bills in change.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-02, 06:49 PM
Obviously.
What I was getting at was that there is no system in place to retire* the circulation of a particular design.There is a system in place to do that, it's just not clear if it is actually used with that criteria in mind. The Federal Reserve withdraws from circulation currency that is counterfeit and unfit (which probably means damaged, but might mean more) and that means they have the ability to select by design. So, the question is not if they have the capability, but why they don't use it... assuming they're not already using it.


I guess that's a stronger lobby than the dancer's lobby. I'm sure they would love to get 5's now. After all, how long ago were they getting 1's that are worth today's 5's?A reliance on fivers would probably mean an overall decline in revenue due to fewer transaction as a whole. Management's lobbies are almost always stronger than workers' lobbies. And in case no one got the hint, I was also referring to blackmailing congressman because they would know of their activities at those establishments.


Use the penny slot.
Actually; if you retire the bill, you have a nice sized slot. Just get rid of that springy hold down thing.Obviously, but the issue is whether that slot will hold as much in coins as it held in bills.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-02, 07:00 PM
Obviously, but the issue is whether that slot will hold as much in coins as it held in bills.
Quarters have a similar issue. Since the cashiers keep them in thier rolls until they are needed, then they would seldom need to hold more than a roll. Most cash registers I have seen can easily fit 2 to 3 rolls (about 100 coins).

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-02, 07:06 PM
Quarters have a similar issue. Since the cashiers keep them in thier rolls until they are needed, then they would seldom need to hold more than a roll. Most cash registers I have seen can easily fit 2 to 3 rolls (about 100 coins).But that's apples and oranges. Not only do I not recall quarter dollars ever coming in an Oranges format, it's not clear if a future $1 issuance in coin would be in the quarter's apple format.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-02, 07:29 PM
But that's apples and oranges. Not only do I not recall quarter dollars ever coming in an Oranges format, it's not clear if a future $1 issuance in coin would be in the quarter's apple format.
I don't see the difference. Please explain.

publius
2012-Apr-02, 07:40 PM
Yes, retiring currency is easy enough. The Fed would just order the banks to turn in the targeted currency as they receive it, and not give any more out. That would be attrition, and it would work fine. And, as an additional step, you can decree that by a certain date in the future, the targeted currency would no longer be legal tender, but could still be exchanged at a bank past that date. The banks are the instrument by which worn out currency is continously replaced anyway.

Believe it or not, currency with an expiration date has actually been done before. There's a name for it, I forget, but it's a monetary trick in desperate times to try to get people to start spending money (use before it expires) in times of deflationary depression. "Stamp scrip", that's what it's called. Basically it's implemented as a tax on holding currency. At the end of a given period, you must pay a tax and get the currency stamped with a new stamp to make it good for the next period.

What that is is just a way to implement a negative interest rate, of course, to fight the dreaded zero bound on interest rates which produces the dreaded liquidity trap --> deflationary spiral. Some argue we're in that now, and some of our economic geniuses have made proposals for various negative interest rate schemes like this. This isn't the Black Monday thread where we've discussed all this crap at length, but suffice it to say in my opinion, we're in a debt overhang trap, not a true liquidity trap.

publius
2012-Apr-02, 07:58 PM
And I'll agree that opposition to dollar coins is mostly pyschological. We've used them in past, but have just become set in our ways of using bills now. The only way to get the public to change is to force it by withdrawing the $1 bill from circulation and forcing people to use coins. There would be much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth and hissy fits thrown, but we'd get over it.

Me, if I were in charge, I would force the change, but emotionally, I'd hate myself for it and would complain like everyone else would. :lol: And I'd pull the penny as well.

We used to have a half cent coin which was withdrawn from circulation around 1857 or so and a new, smaller one cent coin introduced. The inflation factor from then to now is a whopping 20:1, actually a little greater, meaning a half cent coin was the equivalent of a dime today. Thus, in purchasing power terms, they did the equivalent of pulling the dime from circulation and making the smallest unit 20 cents, close to a quarter today.

When the Brits withdrew the farthing back around 1960 or whenever it was, the purchasing power was several times our current penny. Indeed, I think the penny has less purchasing power than any smallest unit of currency in any decent (non hyperinlationary banana republic crap) economy.

Fazor
2012-Apr-02, 08:15 PM
The more I think about it, the more I enjoy the idea of carrying around a coin pouch tied to my belt a-la ... well, any time prior to the early 1900's?

And if I ever turned to the dark side, I could carry around a small dagger with which to cut purse-strings of the more fortunate. Society lacks that level of olde-fashioned highwayman'ism that we see in the movies.

Swift
2012-Apr-02, 08:22 PM
Yes, retiring currency is easy enough. The Fed would just order the banks to turn in the targeted currency as they receive it, and not give any more out. That would be attrition, and it would work fine. And, as an additional step, you can decree that by a certain date in the future, the targeted currency would no longer be legal tender, but could still be exchanged at a bank past that date. The banks are the instrument by which worn out currency is continously replaced anyway.
It happened all over Europe upon the adoption of the Euro.

I still have a 10 Pfennig (Deutschmark) and 50 centime (French francs) coins in my desk as souvenirs.

Jim
2012-Apr-02, 08:31 PM
Actually, my wife has apparently always gone on the premise that money has an expiration date and should be spent quickly before it decomposes or combusts or something.

Swift
2012-Apr-02, 08:43 PM
Actually, my wife has apparently always gone on the premise that money has an expiration date and should be spent quickly before it decomposes or combusts or something.
:lol: My wife has the same theory. They must both be economists.

You know, "paper" money isn't really paper (wood pulp), it is actually closer to cotton fabric. Maybe the cotton weevils will eat it. Now I know, you're going to ask me for some proof of this. But come one, everyone knows that money is the root of all weevil.

SeanF
2012-Apr-02, 08:44 PM
I don't think any solution would be without its issues, but in a way yes. Maybe there could be some requirement beforehand that requires certain businesses and institutions to stop handing them out for a while which would greatly reduce the amount in circulation (and to prevent someone getting "stuck" with some as they get phased out).
The trouble with prohibiting businesses from handing them out is that it greatly increases the amount of cash a business needs to keep on hand. I mean, the five dollar bill one customer gives the business is the same one that business gives in change to the next customer. If they can't do that with "old" fives, they've got to keep a stock of "new" fives in the till.

And I wonder how much of a problem it really is. I just checked my wallet - I've got 14 bills in there right now. One is dated 2004 and 12 are dated 2006. The remaining bill is a 1976 $2 bill - I'm not even sure why I carry it around, because I go out of my way not to spend it. :)


Up here, I prefer the 1$ and 2$ coins (2$ coin especially because it cuts down the number of Loonies I get back). Paying a 75cent item with a 5$ bill gets me back 3 coins: 2 toonies and a quarter; whereas if you didn't have the 2$ coin you'd get 5 coins back. But anyways, the Loonie and Toonie I find are nice especially because they are large enough you can blindly find them easier than the rest of the coins; Reach into your pocket and you can pluck them out pretty easily. That, and the weight factor does make me pay with them before bills when I can, while saving my bills as much as possible.
You know, it seems to me that the opening sentence of that paragraph is almost completely contradicted by the rest of it. It seems that you "prefer" the $2 coin, not the $1 coin, and you only "prefer" it in the sense that you "prefer" to get rid of it again as soon as you can. :)


I don't see the difference. Please explain.
If I may be so bold as to speak for Ara, quarters have always been coins, never bills, and a dollar coin would probably be different in size/weight than a quarter. Therefore, Ara suspects that looking at how cash registers/tellers handle quarters doesn't tell us much about how they would handle a hypothetical dollar coin.


Believe it or not, currency with an expiration date has actually been done before. There's a name for it, I forget, but it's a monetary trick in desperate times to try to get people to start spending money (use before it expires) in times of deflationary depression. "Stamp scrip", that's what it's called.
How does that work for change? If I pay for something with two $10s with different expiration dates, what am I entitled to demand be the expiration date on the $5 and $1s I get as change? :)

publius
2012-Apr-02, 09:01 PM
How does that work for change? If I pay for something with two $10s with different expiration dates, what am I entitled to demand be the expiration date on the $5 and $1s I get as change? :)

Keep in mind this is desperation measures, but all the money would have the same expiration date. Same the period is a month. At the end of the month, you must pay a certain tax (negative interest rate) on all the currency you hold and get it stamped for the next month in order for it to be legal tender to use. The idea is this makes currency a "hot potato" and everyone tries to spend it before the end of the month, thus increasing monetary velocity.

That was actually done here in the US back in the Depression. It was done with a local paper currency, not the dollar. It's funny. It's legal to implement your own paper currency if you like (provided you don't try to represent it as real US currency), but illegal to do it with coin, and that is due to the different legal nature of coin vs paper currency. The power to "coin money" lies exclusively with the federal government and no other entity may exercise it. Congress has the power to make paper legal tender, but others can use their own paper and whatever non-coin tokens they want as currency (but have to pay tax on the equivalent value of transactions done with it, and in legal tender. :) ).

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-02, 09:21 PM
I don't see the difference. Please explain.What difference don't you see? Quarters are not dollars. A Dollar coin may not be the same size as a quarter, it may be larger. Even if it were the same size, to get back to the original point, a quick look shows that you can only fit 60 quarter-sized coins in the same volume as 100 bills if stacked in 12 piles of 5. If stacked sideways in two columns, an unlikely configuration without using a new tray design/insert, you'd still only get 178 where you could fit 200 bills.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-02, 09:43 PM
So, you want a deadline at which stores will no longer accept the older bills, and anybody who still has older bills has just lost the value of that money?

Should they just print bills with an expiration date on them? :)
Stores will not, banks will still.

At least that was the way it's been done in Denmark whenever a specific design or coin value has been withdrawn, most recently when the 25 Ýre coin was pulled. Now our smallest coin is worth bit less than a dime, with the penny and nickle equivalents dropped a while ago.
Oh, and the cutoff point between coin and paper is at the $5-$10 mark, smallest bill is worth about $9 (50 kr), largest coin about $3.5 (20 kr).

publius
2012-Apr-02, 10:41 PM
What difference don't you see? Quarters are not dollars. A Dollar coin may not be the same size as a quarter, it may be larger. Even if it were the same size, to get back to the original point, a quick look shows that you can only fit 60 quarter-sized coins in the same volume as 100 bills if stacked in 12 piles of 5. If stacked sideways in two columns, an unlikely configuration without using a new tray design/insert, you'd still only get 178 where you could fit 200 bills.

To do it right, the new dollar coin (that would be used) needs to be readily identifiable as different from every other coin. We could make it smaller than a quarter, but to make it work, it would need to be easily distinguished. I'd go with a different color, making it gold or tan looking, and try to give it some distinctive feel. Let's see, I think the current presidential and Sacagawea coins are brass colored, but they have a tendency to tarnish, especially on the raised areas. I think they've suspended production now, as they're doing nothing but piling up in the Fed vaults.

publius
2012-Apr-03, 12:54 AM
The more I think about it, the more I enjoy the idea of carrying around a coin pouch tied to my belt a-la ... well, any time prior to the early 1900's?

And if I ever turned to the dark side, I could carry around a small dagger with which to cut purse-strings of the more fortunate. Society lacks that level of olde-fashioned highwayman'ism that we see in the movies.

I've always loathed to carry around change in my pockets as well. The trouble with that is change piles up at home. One of my aunts gave me a little change purse for Christmas one year, and told me I'd like if I ever started using it just like her husband did. I didn't bother for a while, but then I started, and sure enough, I like it.

It's not a bag, but a stiff pouch of an affair that will fit in the palm of your hand nicely. It has a little flap that serves as a tray. You open it up in your hand and turn it upside down and all the change slides out in the tray, allowing you easy access. When done, you turn back around, the change slides back in the pouch and you close the tray/flap. It fits in your pocket nicely. In the winter, when I'm wearing a coat, I prefer to keep it in my inside coat pocket rather than my front pants pocket.

Because of that, I now give as much change as I get, and it doesn't pile up anymore.

Nowhere Man
2012-Apr-03, 01:19 AM
Does anyone here remember if those big dollars and half dollars were common in transactions? I got those a lot as a kid (kids get impressed at those kinds of things), but don't know how readily they were circulated.
I don't really remember, as such, but I've done a bit of research. Half-dollars were quite common until the changeover from silver alloy to clad copper. This happened a year or three after Kennedy was shot, and subsequently put on the half, so a combination of sentimentality and silver hoarding drastically reduced the number of half-dollars in circulation. By the time the mint produced enough replacement coins, people had gotten out of the habit of using them.

Probably something similar happened with the old wagon-wheel dollars. In The Maltese Falcon (1931), Spade gives a cabbie a dollar coin in exchange for information. They were common enough that the size was used as a model for many casino tokens.

I wish the US would drop the dollar bill (and the two-dollar bill), and start making one- and two-dollar coins.

Fred

SeanF
2012-Apr-03, 02:53 AM
Keep in mind this is desperation measures, but all the money would have the same expiration date. Same the period is a month. At the end of the month, you must pay a certain tax (negative interest rate) on all the currency you hold and get it stamped for the next month in order for it to be legal tender to use. The idea is this makes currency a "hot potato" and everyone tries to spend it before the end of the month, thus increasing monetary velocity.
Got it. That makes sense. :)

publius
2012-Apr-03, 03:19 AM
$2 bills: They've never been that popular (and their are tales of young store clerks thinking $2 bill weren't real and calling the cops when someone tried to use them), and I got interested and looked it up. It's been so long, we've all forgotten it, but in the old days, $2 bills got a reputation as being unlucky and even uncooth. In the old days a short session at a house of ill repute was $2 (as late as the '30s), and thus $2 bills became associated with that. Then, they became associated with voter fraud, with supposed ringers who would fradulently vote being supposedly paid $2 per fradulent vote. And finally they became associated with betting on horse racing, $2 being some common bet amount.

So being in possesion of $2 bills came to be a blemish on one's reputation and thus bad luck. The term "deuce" has negative connotations anways. If you received a $2 bill, that meant bad luck, and a supposed superstitutious antidote was to tear off a corner of that $2 bill.

But that was in the old days, and we've pretty much forgotten it, although we still don't use them much. There were no Federal Reserve $2 Notes until 1976, at which time they were authorized. Before that, most of the $2s in circulation were US Notes (whether they existed in silver and gold certificate form, I didn't look up, although they did exist as national bank notes in the Free Banking era in various forms). They don't regularly print them, only as needed when enough banks demand them. The last series was 2003, and the last printing of that was in 2006.

SeanF
2012-Apr-03, 11:06 AM
Geez, maybe I shouldn't be carrying that thing around.

Jim
2012-Apr-03, 11:58 AM
$2 bills: They've never been that popular ...

There is a local scrap metal dealer who advertises that he will "pay you in two dollar bills!"

Solfe
2012-Apr-03, 12:13 PM
I like dollar coins and two dollar bills. I do have to admit that if you spend them, both have a tendency of confusing cashiers. I have a tiny collection of both. We need to bring back the 50 cent piece. :)

DonM435
2012-Apr-03, 12:37 PM
There was a magic trick that I learned as a kid: You asked the subject to extract a $1 bill from pocket/purse but keep it out of sight. Then you squinted a bit, shut your eyes, and announced the date on the bill. People checked it and were stunned.

It worked because, for a stretch of several years, virtually every bill in circulation had a 1958 date on it. (I think that was the year.) So, the U.S. Treasury must have had an efficient turnaround in removing and replacing old bills, and must have let that dating go on for a few years.

But, right about the time that I learned the trick, it stopped working. 1963-dated bills were issued and began to take over.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-03, 01:09 PM
What difference don't you see? Quarters are not dollars.
That's not quite the difference I was thinking. I was thinking that we handle quarters just fine, so dollars would handl just fine.
A dollar slot is at least 2 to 3 times larger than a quarter slot in a register.


A Dollar coin may not be the same size as a quarter, it may be larger.
The volume difference between a loonie and a quarter is 25%.


a quick look shows that you can only fit 60 quarter-sized coins in the same volume as 100 bills if stacked in 12 piles of 5. If stacked sideways in two columns, an unlikely configuration without using a new tray design/insert, you'd still only get 178 where you could fit 200 bills.
RARELY do businesses keep that many singles in a slot. Most work off the bundle of 50s or 100s. When they start getting low they will put another bundle in. So; most of the time, we are talking between about 20 and 120.
By the way. My company configures cash register systems. There is plenty of room in the drawers to accomodate this coinage and room for extras. They are not so custom that they can't handle any exceptions. There is the need for coupons, checks, various other documentation, paper clips, extra bills, un-common denominations (50s,100s), etc.

I don't even know why this is a big deal. Tell me why Canada didn't have trouble with both paper and coin during thier transition, or even why they didn't have trouble introducing the toonie.

I also find it interesting that on another thread you are willing to impose a drastic change in transportation on the general public, but resist something as simple as a coinage change that has already been done in other countries with no issues.


To do it right, the new dollar coin (that would be used) needs to be readily identifiable as different from every other coin.
I wholeheartedly agree. The SBA dollars were a flop because they were too hard to distinguish from quarters. They tried that (11?) sided indentation around the edge, but since it was an interior surface it was very hard to tell. I didn't like those.
I actually liked the Sacagawea. Although it could tarnish (like any coin) it at least had a smooth edge that was easy to feel. Yes, a quarter's edge will wear over time to be smooth, but the thickness still made it feel much different.
Besides, I have that trouble today between pennies and dimes. They get old and hard to distinguish.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-03, 02:13 PM
I lived in the states when the Sacadollar was out and I liked it a lot because it was similar to the Loonie in many ways; (similar size and colouring IIRC).

Just to clarify as well, unlike the States, Canada had no qualms about using a 2$ bill in regular circulation, so when the Toonie came out, it just took over the 2$ bill slot in the cashier drawers, and the bills were shifted over a bit as the 2$ bill became less and less used.




You know, it seems to me that the opening sentence of that paragraph is almost completely contradicted by the rest of it. It seems that you "prefer" the $2 coin, not the $1 coin, and you only "prefer" it in the sense that you "prefer" to get rid of it again as soon as you can. :)


Well it's more of a habit than anything. If I know I have toonies and loonies on hand, I'll generally use them up before I go to the bills. The coins make it easier for me to tell I have them instead of having to sort through bills. And the coin sizes are large enough that they're easy to see and pick out of a handful of change. (Easier than quarters IMO). It's probably just my own personal preferences, but having grown up with loonies and toonies, I greatly prefer them over the bills; they just seem easier to use. Easier to pick out of the pile of coins instead of finding 1$ and 2$ bills in a pile of bills.

Of course Canadian Currency is fully colour coded too, so even bill picking isn't too difficult. IMO the only thing worst than the fact that the US hasn't ditched the dollar bill, is that they haven't gone to different coloured bills. (And no, a purple number on an otherwise green bill doesn't count)

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-03, 06:07 PM
That's not quite the difference I was thinking. I was thinking that we handle quarters just fine, so dollars would handl just fine.
A dollar slot is at least 2 to 3 times larger than a quarter slot in a register. I was using a dollar tray as mentioned above.


The volume difference between a loonie and a quarter is 25%. We're talking about the differences between US quarters and an imaginary US dollar coin.


RARELY do businesses keep that many singles in a slot. Most work off the bundle of 50s or 100s. When they start getting low they will put another bundle in. So; most of the time, we are talking between about 20 and 120. Right, but that doesn't change physics, which is what I was talking about. It just means that the limitation may not make a difference. Different argument.

If we want to start talking about vending machines, on the other hand...


By the way. My company configures cash register systems. There is plenty of room in the drawers to accomodate this coinage and room for extras. They are not so custom that they can't handle any exceptions. There is the need for coupons, checks, various other documentation, paper clips, extra bills, un-common denominations (50s,100s), etc. Appeal to Authority? Okay... Since I have a degree in Poli-Sci and know people who knew Hastert and Obama, et al, you can trust that I know the change to change won't happen on their watch.


I don't even know why this is a big deal. Tell me why Canada didn't have trouble with both paper and coin during thier transition, or even why they didn't have trouble introducing the toonie.Apples and Oranges. Canada also has universal healthcare.


I also find it interesting that on another thread you are willing to impose a drastic change in transportation on the general public, but resist something as simple as a coinage change that has already been done in other countries with no issues.Because that would be optional. Now, if we had both dollar coins and paper money in circulation so that it was optional I'd be fine with it, but then registers would have to accommodate an additional coin. And the point of my posts in that thread was to replicate and simulate the driver. If you can make a coin that replicates the softness and fold-ability of paper money...

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-03, 06:23 PM
To do it right, the new dollar coin (that would be used) needs to be readily identifiable as different from every other coin. We could make it smaller than a quarter, but to make it work, it would need to be easily distinguished. I'd go with a different color, making it gold or tan looking, and try to give it some distinctive feel. Let's see, I think the current presidential and Sacagawea coins are brass colored, but they have a tendency to tarnish, especially on the raised areas. I think they've suspended production now, as they're doing nothing but piling up in the Fed vaults.I think it'd be cool to have a coin that has a hole in it, or maybe an inner coin of a different metal/color. I'm sure that would present some problems, so maybe they should use that for a larger denomination that won't get used as much. We should issue coin versions of all bills in circulation. Imagine how much the government would make in seigniorage!

I just wonder if it would be easier to successfully counterfeit coins or if they can include security features. If not, then maybe large values won't be acceptable at stores and could only be exchanged at banks.

I've never seen a Sacagawea Dollar.

Gillianren
2012-Apr-03, 06:54 PM
Appeal to Authority?

You know how the appeal to legitimate authority isn't a fallacy? Having experience with the manufacture of cash registers is legitimate authority in this discussion.


I think it'd be cool to have a coin that has a hole in it, or maybe an inner coin of a different metal/color. I'm sure that would present some problems, so maybe they should use that for a larger denomination that won't get used as much.

Like $2?

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-03, 06:54 PM
One optimal point for a coin is where the metal is worth less than the denomination, but it actually costs more to make it that it's worth.
That'll keep them in circulation while making forging self-defeating.

And no, there's nothing strange about a society where a coin costs more to make for the treasury than it's worth, the societal gain of its existence is in the transactions it's involved in rather than in its intrinsic value through existing. Every time its used it adds a little bit to the value of the society.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-03, 10:14 PM
We're talking about the differences between US quarters and an imaginary US dollar coin.

Except the US dollar coin is NOT imaginary, several versions are at least officially in circulation, including SBA, Sacajawea, and the new presidential dollars. The US quarter has a mass of 5.67g and a diameter of 24.26mm. The Sacajawea dollar has a mass of 8.1g and a diameter of 26.5mm; the SBA and presidential dollars are the same. The Loonie has a mass of 7.0g (changing this year to 6.27g) and a diameter of 26.5mm, so it's the same diameter but a little lighter than the US ones.

publius
2012-Apr-04, 03:36 AM
We should issue coin versions of all bills in circulation. Imagine how much the government would make in seigniorage!



Doing that to any significant extent would take monetary policy out of the control of the Fed, actually. Coin is direct Treasury currency, created by Treasury and spent (directly or indirectly) by Treasury into circulation. There's no easy means to take it out. FRNs and the electronic digi-dollars are controlled by the Fed. As it stands now, total Treasury currency outstanding (which is mostly coin, but also includes the few US Notes and others still in circulation) stands at $44.4B.

Compare that to a total monetary base (M0) of $2.65T (of which over $1.5T is electronic, QEed into existence), and a total of $1.05T physical FRNs in circulation. The value of coinage is just 5% of the physical FRNs and only 1.7% of the total M0. Any significant change in that balance would be a serious monetary change. Note that replacing dollar bills with coin wouldn't be much, as there's only about $10B in $1 FRNs out there by value, even though they comprise 1/3 of the total volume of bills outstanding. And further note this means that the majority of the monetary base exists not as coin or paper, but as bits in the Fed's computers.

Seigniorage in the moden central bank scheme comes from the "profit" the cental bank makes which goes directly to the sovereign, the Treasury in our case, and with all of Helicopter's QEing, that has pushed $80B the last couple of years, about 3 times typical profits pre-Crisis and pre-printing frenzy. That is far greater than any coinage seigniorage.

Of course in reality, that notion of profit exists only when you separate the Fed from the federal government. THe brunt of the Fed's profit come from interest on the Ts it has monetized, so the profit it returns is just returning the interest on those monetized Ts, which would be readily apparent if you merged the Fed's balance sheet with Uncle and considered them one entity. Of course, with Helicopter still having close to a trillion of MBSes on his balance sheet, some of the profit comes from private sector interest, but you can still consider it just cancelled interest on monetized federal govt. debt.

And that reminds me that the expenses for printing money (roughly 9 cents per bill) are put on the Fed's balance sheet, not Uncle's. Thus printing expenses don't show up as a federal expense, and only subtract from the "profit" returned to Treasury. So that expense is really hidden in the interest expense category, although now, the interest from the MBSes is more than enough to cover that printing expense by a long shot.

baskerbosse
2012-Apr-04, 03:49 AM
There is one problem with getting rid of the penny;
-What would you put in the the penny-pinchers?

:-)

Peter

SeanF
2012-Apr-04, 11:47 AM
The Loonie has a mass of 7.0g (changing this year to 6.27g)...
They're changing the mass of the coin? Won't that mess up the vending machines, or do they validate the coins through other means?

EDIT: I did some checking, and apparently vending machines identify coins based on diameter and magnetic signature. So as long as those don't change, the vending machines will still recognize the coins.

In fact, the Sacajawea dollar and the SBA dollar, despite appearing very different visually, actually have the same diameter and metal composition, so vending machines that were configured to accept the SBA will accept the Sacajaweas without modification.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-04, 01:01 PM
We're talking about the differences between US quarters and an imaginary US dollar coin.
Trebuchet was correct. (thank you)

Except the US dollar coin is NOT imaginary, several versions are at least officially in circulation, including SBA, Sacajawea, and the new presidential dollars. The US quarter has a mass of 5.67g and a diameter of 24.26mm. The Sacajawea dollar has a mass of 8.1g and a diameter of 26.5mm; the SBA and presidential dollars are the same. The Loonie has a mass of 7.0g (changing this year to 6.27g) and a diameter of 26.5mm, so it's the same diameter but a little lighter than the US ones.
I got the numbers for the quarter and the Sac dollar from the treasury's web site.


Right, but that doesn't change physics, which is what I was talking about. It just means that the limitation may not make a difference. Different argument.
I'm not sure what you are saying here so I'll skip this.



Appeal to Authority? Okay... Since I have a degree in Poli-Sci and know people who knew Hastert and Obama, et al, you can trust that I know the change to change won't happen on their watch.
Gillian was correct. (thank you)

You know how the appeal to legitimate authority isn't a fallacy? Having experience with the manufacture of cash registers is legitimate authority in this discussion.
Although; I'd like to add, that an appeal to authority is also a blind appeal. Again; I'm stating opinion based on my experience and only giving background for it. I am not saying that this is how it is, just that I've seen it that way.
Oh, and it's not really manufacturing, it's just mating the drawers to the rest of the electronics and displays



Apples and Oranges.
How can that be apples and oranges? We have a dollar bill, Canada had a dollar bill. We have a dollar coin, Canada went to a dollar coin. It's a direct analogy.



Because that would be optional. Now, if we had both dollar coins and paper money in circulation so that it was optional I'd be fine with it, but then registers would have to accommodate an additional coin.
Like I said, I'm not sure how Canada did it, but they didn't seem to have a problem with it. (I think I remember being there during the transition and having both, but I can't even be sure of that)



If you can make a coin that replicates the softness and fold-ability of paper money...
Ok; so you like the bill better. That's fine and an opinion I can respect. But; arguing cash registers seems pointless to me.



I think it'd be cool to have a coin that has a hole in it, or maybe an inner coin of a different metal/color. I'm sure that would present some problems, so maybe they should use that for a larger denomination that won't get used as much.
Apparently you are arguing from a lack of knowledge of the Canadian coin system. I suggest you look up "Canada Two Dollar Coin".



We should issue coin versions of all bills in circulation. Imagine how much the government would make in seigniorage!
That sounds like a sarcastic remark. A dollar coin would cost the government less than a dollar bill over their lifetime. (I don't know if it would work as you go up the scale though)



I've never seen a Sacagawea Dollar.
Again, don't knock it if you don't know it. The Sacagawea Dollar is considerably different than the SBA, and is very noticable to me. Showing you a picture wouldn't really help because a lot of it is in the feel.

Swift
2012-Apr-04, 02:02 PM
Apples and Oranges. Canada also has universal healthcare.
Absolutely do not go there - off topic and very volatile politics.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-04, 03:04 PM
They're changing the mass of the coin? Won't that mess up the vending machines, or do they validate the coins through other means?

EDIT: I did some checking, and apparently vending machines identify coins based on diameter and magnetic signature. So as long as those don't change, the vending machines will still recognize the coins.

In fact, the Sacajawea dollar and the SBA dollar, despite appearing very different visually, actually have the same diameter and metal composition, so vending machines that were configured to accept the SBA will accept the Sacajaweas without modification.

Yeah, since the Loonie's weight is changing, vending machines have to be updated. The only one I've heard complaining about it is Bell Canada, who wants to increase payphone costs to a dollar (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/04/02/bell-payphones.html) in part to pay for changing the currency acceptor. Telus has already said they don't see a need to charge more at this time for their pay phones.

Moose
2012-Apr-04, 03:21 PM
Like I said, I'm not sure how Canada did it, but they didn't seem to have a problem with it. (I think I remember being there during the transition and having both, but I can't even be sure of that)

Just some grumbling at first. We got used to it fairly quickly.

The only folks who really had a problem with the twonie were vending machine and cash register makers who'd run out of slots in their products' chassis and had to scramble to accommodate the new coin. And they got over it too.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-04, 03:32 PM
The only folks who really had a problem with the twonie were vending machine and cash register makers who'd run out of slots in their products' chassis and had to scramble to accommodate the new coin. And they got over it too.
If you know...Was the cash register issue just with the twonie, or for the loonie too? Was it a lot of vendors or just a few?

Either way, I do apologize to Ari for getting so technical and deep into the subject, but this comment does show it's not really an issue which is really the root of what I was trying to portray. I just got too buried in the subject.

SeanF
2012-Apr-04, 03:43 PM
Yeah, since the Loonie's weight is changing, vending machines have to be updated. The only one I've heard complaining about it is Bell Canada, who wants to increase payphone costs to a dollar (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/04/02/bell-payphones.html) in part to pay for changing the currency acceptor. Telus has already said they don't see a need to charge more at this time for their pay phones.
So, wait a second, that contradicts what I found, which was that the weight of the coin wouldn't matter to the vending machines. Or do payphones validate the coins differently than vending machines?

Moose
2012-Apr-04, 03:50 PM
If you know...Was the cash register issue just with the twonie, or for the loonie too? Was it a lot of vendors or just a few?

Vending machines and cash registers of that generation were already rigged to expand by the one coin, apparently. The retrofits were fairly minor and had already been somewhat planned for.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-04, 05:54 PM
Vending machines and cash registers of that generation were already rigged to expand by the one coin, apparently. The retrofits were fairly minor and had already been somewhat planned for.
That could be a reason for what my experience has seen too. We are a North American vendor (not just U.S.), so they probably just go with one design for both countries. (BTW. Cash registers, [or as we call it, point of sale] is only a mere fraction of what we do)

I wonder how widespread that is. I would think that many cash machine vendors might have a single design to cover both.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-04, 06:33 PM
One optimal point for a coin is where the metal is worth less than the denomination, but it actually costs more to make it that it's worth.
That'll keep them in circulation while making forging self-defeating.

The first part of that is important. I remember the great penny shortage of 1974. Copper was more expensive by weight than pennies. Everyone was hoarding them expecting to make profits on a further rise of price in copper.

ravens_cry
2012-Apr-04, 07:26 PM
The most recent pennies were magnetic since they are just a thin layer of copper over some kind of steel. Which means 2012 pennies tend to RUST.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-04, 09:52 PM
You know how the appeal to legitimate authority isn't a fallacy? Having experience with the manufacture of cash registers is legitimate authority in this discussion.You know that I didn't write that he had committed a fallacy? I usually claim something as a fallacy if I am invoking it. Assuming he does have authority on the matter, which has not been qualified (Maybe he's a night watchman at the company, so how do I know what he knows about it it?), he didn't offer anything specific to my questions, just suppositions. An appeal to authority may be allowable an argument if its true and when it reinforces a useful statement, but using it as a means of ending discussion with an "I'm right because I know better" it starts to drift into counter-productive territory.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-04, 09:54 PM
Except the US dollar coin is NOT imaginary, several versions are at least officially in circulation, including SBA, Sacajawea, and the new presidential dollars. The US quarter has a mass of 5.67g and a diameter of 24.26mm. The Sacajawea dollar has a mass of 8.1g and a diameter of 26.5mm; the SBA and presidential dollars are the same. The Loonie has a mass of 7.0g (changing this year to 6.27g) and a diameter of 26.5mm, so it's the same diameter but a little lighter than the US ones.We weren't talking about extant coin designs, but an future coin design, which means it is not extant, so we can't claim it will have identical or similar characteristics since we do not know what characteristics it will have.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-04, 09:57 PM
Seigniorage in the moden central bank scheme comes from the "profit" the cental bank makes which goes directly to the sovereign...

Perhaps I should have mentioned that I was referring to collectors taking them out of circulation, such as with the 50 States Quarters program.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-04, 10:30 PM
Trebuchet was correct. (thank you)No, he wasn't. He confused the past with the future, which is the subject under discussion.


I'm not sure what you are saying here so I'll skip this.Volume and packing capacity as a physical property of the issues under discussion.


Gillian was correct. (thank you)Her statement on word usage was factually correct, but not in conflict and it really didn't address what I wrote or what you wrote, so it's not really applicable. Nor does referring to her off-topic response answer the point I put to you.


Although; I'd like to add, that an appeal to authority is also a blind appeal. Again; I'm stating opinion based on my experience and only giving background for it. I am not saying that this is how it is, just that I've seen it that way.
Oh, and it's not really manufacturing, it's just mating the drawers to the rest of the electronics and displaysThat's fair, but if you're going to claim authority I'd prefer that you answer my point instead of dismissing it. My point is that you're suggesting work-arounds instead of proper design, which may or may not work depending on layout of the drawer, cashflow and other factors that vary depending on the business using the register and its practices. Maybe they'll just buy new drawers/tray inserts, but that will cost them money and so they may lobby against it. Large corporations are resistant to change, at least in my experience from trying to change their practices.

I'll take your word for it and grant you authority if you want it. But since you work for the company, you do have a monetary incentive with regards to the issues under discussion, so we will need to keep that in mind. Authority comes with both pros and cons.


How can that be apples and oranges? We have a dollar bill, Canada had a dollar bill. We have a dollar coin, Canada went to a dollar coin. It's a direct analogy.Because Canada is not the United States. We have a similar culture in some ways but are very different in other ways. The fact that we do a lot of things differently is evidence of this.


Like I said, I'm not sure how Canada did it, but they didn't seem to have a problem with it. (I think I remember being there during the transition and having both, but I can't even be sure of that)I wasn't suggesting a transition period. I was suggesting having both forms full-time on a permanent basis, but not as a counter-proposal, only as an example to a concept you brought out of another thread.


Ok; so you like the bill better. That's fine and an opinion I can respect. But; arguing cash registers seems pointless to me.Then why were you arguing with me in the first place?


Apparently you are arguing from a lack of knowledge of the Canadian coin system. I suggest you look up "Canada Two Dollar Coin".I wasn't referring to Canadian coins. Nor was I responding to you in that comment.


That sounds like a sarcastic remark. A dollar coin would cost the government less than a dollar bill over their lifetime. (I don't know if it would work as you go up the scale though)I was responding to someone else's post, so why do you think it was directed at you? Please take it down a notch.


Again, don't knock it if you don't know it. The Sacagawea Dollar is considerably different than the SBA, and is very noticable to me. Showing you a picture wouldn't really help because a lot of it is in the feel.I'm not knocking it. I was stating the simple fact that I've never seen one in circulation. Please don't read anything into it.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-04, 10:58 PM
So, wait a second, that contradicts what I found, which was that the weight of the coin wouldn't matter to the vending machines. Or do payphones validate the coins differently than vending machines?

Payphones may validate differently, or mechanisms may go differently depending on the company.

Most likely however, it's Bell Canada looking for another way to gouge customers.

Gillianren
2012-Apr-05, 05:30 AM
You know that I didn't write that he had committed a fallacy? I usually claim something as a fallacy if I am invoking it. Assuming he does have authority on the matter, which has not been qualified (Maybe he's a night watchman at the company, so how do I know what he knows about it it?), he didn't offer anything specific to my questions, just suppositions. An appeal to authority may be allowable an argument if its true and when it reinforces a useful statement, but using it as a means of ending discussion with an "I'm right because I know better" it starts to drift into counter-productive territory.

How is "this is my experience as it pertains to working with cash registers" irrelevant to a direct reference to how things work with cash registers? After all, the information provided was how it was used in a directly analogous situation. Yes, the United States and Canada are two different countries. However, why assume that the US Mint will do things substantially differently? Wouldn't it make sense for them to use the Canadians' expertise in how to do things right, given how well it's worked before? And perhaps you also missed the point of my referring to a $2 coin as a "higher denomination" to make it be worth doing an inner coin of a different metal--it seems to be doing pretty well by the Canadians.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-05, 01:14 PM
We weren't talking about extant coin designs, but an future coin design, which means it is not extant, so we can't claim it will have identical or similar characteristics since we do not know what characteristics it will have.
Why wouldn't they follow a model that works, why wouldn't they follow the path that they have set?

All my discussion is based on actual history of what has been done. Any discussion not related to today's analogies are insignificant until you can give us some idea of why it would be different or what you think this imaginary future coin design would be.


No, he wasn't. He confused the past with the future, which is the subject under discussion.
And the future is usually based upon past successes.


That's fair, but if you're going to claim authority I'd prefer that you answer my point instead of dismissing it. My point is that you're suggesting work-arounds instead of proper design, which may or may not work depending on layout of the drawer, cashflow and other factors that vary depending on the business using the register and its practices.
Yes; I'm talking about temporary workarounds. Not future design.


Maybe they'll just buy new drawers/tray inserts, but that will cost them money and so they may lobby against it. Large corporations are resistant to change, at least in my experience from trying to change their practices.
They respond to other issues that are far more costly without a lot of fuss. This issue would be a pittance.
And; I'm not advocating that business blindly accept new regulations, just that this particular one has a very small, one time impact compared to the benefits of the American taxpayer.


I'll take your word for it and grant you authority if you want it. But since you work for the company, you do have a monetary incentive with regards to the issues under discussion, so we will need to keep that in mind. Authority comes with both pros and cons.
Two of us have told you this is not an issue of authority, it is an observation. Why do you keep throwing this in?


Because Canada is not the United States. We have a similar culture in some ways but are very different in other ways. The fact that we do a lot of things differently is evidence of this.
What's wrong with using a successful example to base a discussion on?


I wasn't suggesting a transition period. I was suggesting having both forms full-time on a permanent basis, but not as a counter-proposal, only as an example to a concept you brought out of another thread.
Where did I state that having coins and paper would be on a permanent basis?


Then why were you arguing with me in the first place?
Because you seem to have this opinion that this would be a major stumbling block in the idea.
Is that your opinion? Is this a reason that we shouldn't convert from a $1 paper to a $1 coin?


I wasn't referring to Canadian coins. Nor was I responding to you in that comment.
I was responding to someone else's post, so why do you think it was directed at you? Please take it down a notch.
Why do you think I thought it was directed at me?
Why am I not allowed to comment on what you are presenting?
This is a public discussion board. It was a comment that I found worth commenting on.


I'm not knocking it. I was stating the simple fact that I've never seen one in circulation. Please don't read anything into it.
What am I reading into? I am pointing out that you are making decisions without a good feel for the facts.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-05, 02:48 PM
We weren't talking about extant coin designs, but an future coin design, which means it is not extant, so we can't claim it will have identical or similar characteristics since we do not know what characteristics it will have.

Is that a "royal we" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we)? I don't think anyone's talking about it as hypothetical but you. The Treasury has millions of existing dollar coins in storage. It's completely illogical to think they'd change the key parameters if they were serious about switching over.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-05, 03:51 PM
Touching briefly on how Canada handled the transition; I don't recall too clearly but IIRC, because the banks yanked the bills out of circulation as fast as they could, it was a relatively quick transition (a year or so at most). At the start, the Loonies would be tossed in with another coin slot if there wasn't a spare slot available (Similar to what they'd do if they got a 50cent piece). Then towards the end as coins became more common than bills, the bills would be tucked under another bill pile and the Loonies would go in a cup in the 1's slot. Something similar happened with the Toonies/2$ transition as well.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-05, 06:02 PM
How is "this is my experience as it pertains to working with cash registers" irrelevant to a direct reference to how things work with cash registers? After all, the information provided was how it was used in a directly analogous situation.My problem with his statement wasn't its relevance. It was how he ignored the relevance of my question.


Yes, the United States and Canada are two different countries. However, why assume that the US Mint will do things substantially differently? Wouldn't it make sense for them to use the Canadians' expertise in how to do things right, given how well it's worked before?That's the question, isn't it. Will what worked with Canadians work with Americans? I don't know the answer, but I know some of the counter-arguments. Since the status quo is that the US has not retired the dollar bill or two dollar bill and has not successfully replaced it with a coin despite a couple attempts, that makes me the negative and you the affirmative. So, make your case that what worked with Canadians will work with Americans.


And perhaps you also missed the point of my referring to a $2 coin as a "higher denomination" to make it be worth doing an inner coin of a different metal--it seems to be doing pretty well by the Canadians.No, I saw it. I just didn't have anything pressing to say in response. I didn't realize you were talking about the Canadian Toonie. I had forgotten it had such a design, but I'm more concerned with US coin and paper currency. It might be something to keep in mind with regard to the cost or production, as was mentioned by another poster upthread.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-05, 06:51 PM
That's the question, isn't it. Will what worked with Canadians work with Americans? I don't know the answer, but I know some of the counter-arguments. Since the status quo is that the US has not retired the dollar bill or two dollar bill and has not successfully replaced it with a coin despite a couple attempts, that makes me the negative and you the affirmative. So, make your case that what worked with Canadians will work with Americans.

I absolutely agree that acceptance of dollar coins in the US is extremely unlikely without the dollar bill being withdrawn. What worked for Canada was that they did exactly that, officially withdrawing the dollar bill two years after the introduction of the loonie. It helped, of course, that two-dollar bills were already in common circulation in Canada at the time, unlike the US.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-05, 07:10 PM
Why wouldn't they follow a model that works, why wouldn't they follow the path that they have set? The past designs for a US dollar coin were successful? I don't see them in circulation, so that seems to suggest they were/are, in fact, not successful.


All my discussion is based on actual history of what has been done. Any discussion not related to today's analogies are insignificant until you can give us some idea of why it would be different or what you think this imaginary future coin design would be. That's been my point this whole time, that you can't tell me it will work until we know what the design will be. This whole tangent was about a successful transition to a US dollar coin, something that hasn't happened in the US, so there is no history of which you speak.


And the future is usually based upon past successes.Again, what successes?


Yes; I'm talking about temporary workarounds. Not future design.By admitting it's a temporary solution, it merely delays the cost. So, my original point is valid that it will cost them money. Why did you argue this with me?


They respond to other issues that are far more costly without a lot of fuss. This issue would be a pittance.
And; I'm not advocating that business blindly accept new regulations, just that this particular one has a very small, one time impact compared to the benefits of the American taxpayer.You think there really is not a lot of fuss? Have you ever worked in sales or purchasing or accounting? Yes, businesses do spend money, but they prefer to spend it on 1 things they actually want to spend it on, and 2, things they thing will add something of benefit to the company to ultimately increase profit. They are often resistant to mandated changes or changes that force them to spend money to adapt. Even if there is no mandate to change drawers, they will be forced to respond, probably by spending money, and they won't like it. Not only will they have to buy drawers. They may have to change safes, rewrite cash-room procedures, re-shoot cashier training videos, re-assess the ergonomics of heavy coin money on money-handlers for it's potential to be a liability with regard to carpal tunnel or other potential physical ailments and then re-evaluate insurance, reschedule armored truck routes for a heavier, bulkier load that may require shorter routes and therefore more runs and more time and therefore more exposure to attack. Et Cetera.


Two of us have told you this is not an issue of authority, it is an observation. Why do you keep throwing this in?On the contrary, Gillian's actually recognizing and promoting you as an authority. What she said it was not was a fallacy. So tell us, NEOWatcher, what's in it for you if the US changes to a coin system. Will you get overtime?

As a funny aside, I almost got a job a couple years ago working for a company that made cash-counting machines. :)


What's wrong with using a successful example to base a discussion on?You stated upthread that it was a direct analogy, but that's only a superficial interpretation. The US is different in many important respects. Our population is 9-10 times larger, our economy is larger, our politics is fierce and our media play up even small differences of opinion with more effect because of this. US money is used throughout the world, not just in digital terms as a reserve currency but directly in many locations either as or in opposition to local currency. The total population that uses US currency is therefore much larger. A lot of that is in higher denomination bills, but some is smaller. If we get rid of the US dollar bill, we may see fewer users overseas as they wear out and then we can either start shipping larger, heavier loads of dollar coins if they still want them, or let their reliance on the US wane and risk losing US influence overseas. It may not be a major change... or maybe it will be, but are you willing to risk global stability over it?


Where did I state that having coins and paper would be on a permanent basis?You didn't. I did. And I wasn't serious about it. Please try to follow along.


Because you seem to have this opinion that this would be a major stumbling block in the idea.
Is that your opinion? Is this a reason that we shouldn't convert from a $1 paper to a $1 coin?Did I say it would be a major stumbling block? It may be one issue among many, as I've pointed out above, but it is representative of many other problems resulting from the same issue - lower packing density but with a heavier overall weight.


Why do you think I thought it was directed at me? Didn't you? Are you going to tell me you actually thought I was being sarcastic to Publius and thought it was important to point that out?

Why am I not allowed to comment on what you are presenting?
This is a public discussion board. It was a comment that I found worth commenting on.When you misconstrue comments to other people it becomes disruptive. But you're an adult and you can be as disruptive as the mods will allow.


What am I reading into? I am pointing out that you are making decisions without a good feel for the facts.You took my comment out of context and reacted as if it were addressed to your conversation with me in order to try to score points by means of intentional misrepresentation. I was not "knocking it". I was stating that I had never seen a Sacagawea dollar coin, nothing more, nothing less. In that statement to Publius I made no remark about the Sacagawea dollar coin that could be construed as a decision with regard to which facts were of any relevance, much less whether I have a good feel for them or not.

Now, if you are going to say that my statement implies that the Sacagawea dollar coin is a poor coin design because my lack of seeing it means it does not have a wide circulation, then that would be a valid inference, but I didn't state that and more to the point, neither did you when you decided to argue it. If you are going to argue that your comment about the weight of the coin supports some point in its favor, for its ability to be distinguished from other coins by feel alone, my response is that it makes no difference or else it would have made a difference and would be of greater circulation.

Now, if you're going to argue that you were extrapolating that not having seen one makes me unfamiliar enough with the subject matter to not have a valid opinion, as you may be hinting in your response I quoted right above, then come out and say it. Then, I'll answer the same answer I've given to the same argument so far: others by context and I, by explicit statement, are talking about a future coin design, one which might succeed where others have not. If, on the other hand, you actually think that the Sacagawea and the Susan B. Anthony dollar coins have been successful, then make your case.

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-05, 07:19 PM
Is that a "royal we" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we)? I don't think anyone's talking about it as hypothetical but you. The Treasury has millions of existing dollar coins in storage. It's completely illogical to think they'd change the key parameters if they were serious about switching over.On the contrary, it's obvious by context. Commenters have mentioned issues and lack of success with the past and current US dollar coins. If we were to have a successful transition, we would need a design that would be successful.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-05, 08:37 PM
The past designs for a US dollar coin were successful? I don't see them in circulation, so that seems to suggest they were/are, in fact, not successful.
I'm not talking about what the US did or what the US is doing. I'm talking about adopting a model that has worked for others.
I have repeatedly referred to the Canadian model, and you are continually questioning my comments by basing it on the failed US model. This results in you taking my statements out of context and evading the questions by referring to your own idea.
Let me rephrase the question that you failed to answer by replacing the pronouns with nouns to make it a much clearer.
Why couldn't the US follow the Canadian model which has already shown to work for them?
What difference is there in the US people rather than the Canadian people that would change the way the Canadian model would work in the US?


That's been my point this whole time, that you can't tell me it will work until we know what the design will be.
Because I believe the design issue has been solved and it's the US model which is based on "hoping it catches on" is what is failing now.


This whole tangent was about a successful transition to a US dollar coin, something that hasn't happened in the US, so there is no history of which you speak.
How many times do I have to repeat... I'm talking about the history of the Canadian model which should be adopted by the US.



Again, what successes?
Canadian.


By admitting it's a temporary solution, it merely delays the cost. So, my original point is valid that it will cost them money. Why did you argue this with me?
I never said it wouldn't cost money. I'm just of the opinion that the amount is minor.
And, in many cases a delay in cost does save money. Businesses do replace thier equipment on occasion. So; it can be as temporary as they are willing to do, and if it's temporary until the next equipment modification then it has saved money.


You think there really is not a lot of fuss? Have you ever worked in sales or purchasing or accounting? Yes, businesses do spend money, but they prefer to spend it on 1 things they actually want to spend it on, and 2, things they thing will add something of benefit to the company to ultimately increase profit. They are often resistant to mandated changes or changes that force them to spend money to adapt. Even if there is no mandate to change drawers, they will be forced to respond, probably by spending money, and they won't like it. Not only will they have to buy drawers. They may have to change safes, rewrite cash-room procedures, re-shoot cashier training videos, re-assess the ergonomics of heavy coin money on money-handlers for it's potential to be a liability with regard to carpal tunnel or other potential physical ailments and then re-evaluate insurance, reschedule armored truck routes for a heavier, bulkier load that may require shorter routes and therefore more runs and more time and therefore more exposure to attack. Et Cetera.
I don't doubt that those situations will exist, but I am of the opinion that it is not a big issue because (wait for it...) it wasn't a problem when it happened in Canada. Again, I'm using a real life example to base my opinion on.


On the contrary, Gillian's actually recognizing and promoting you as an authority.
That's between you and her. I have already stated clearly that I am commenting based on my own observations and not from an authoritative background. So please leave me out of any "authority" comments.


So tell us, NEOWatcher, what's in it for you if the US changes to a coin system. Will you get overtime?
So, you think I have a motive? No; I don't. Because if it's a drawer change, our company will not be involved. We deal in high volume new installations. In fact, the drawers are given to us by our customers and never go through our inventory.

My motive is helping the government save money. I am willing to accept a dollar coin if it saves money, and I don't have to sift through a bunch of crumpled torn dirty bills to find one that works in a vending machine.


You stated upthread that it was a direct analogy, but that's only a superficial interpretation.
Yes, it's a direct analogy, not a direct comparison. Something for me to base my opinion on.

"Our population is 9-10 times larger, our economy is larger"
Yes; that also means we have a larger volume of currency creation that we can save money on. Pluses and minuses on both sides.
"our politics is fierce and our media play up even small differences of opinion with more effect because of this. "
Yes; but it's also two sided. The balance may remain the same but just louder.

"US money is used throughout the world, not just in digital terms as a reserve currency but directly in many locations either as or in opposition to local currency. The total population that uses US currency is therefore much larger. A lot of that is in higher denomination bills, but some is smaller. "
Where is it used in such small denominations as the $1 bill and to what extent?
I have heard that US currency is valued in other countries, but I usually hear that in relation to larger denominations.

"If we get rid of the US dollar bill, we may see fewer users overseas as they wear out and then we can either start shipping larger, heavier loads of dollar coins if they still want them, or let their reliance on the US wane and risk losing US influence overseas."
We will also see it wear out much slower which greatly reduces the need to ship. Besides, the shipping is cheap based on some of the cheap heavy items that I see in the stores that were made overseas.

"It may not be a major change... or maybe it will be, but are you willing to risk global stability over it?"
My opinion is that the risk is small. We have done far worse things to other countries with no global stability problems. I think currency valuation and market fluctuations are much more of a problem than denomination design.


You didn't. I did. And I wasn't serious about it. Please try to follow along.

Then put a smiley on it before you accuse me of not following along. Your comment with no context of seriousness was an accusation as read.


Did I say it would be a major stumbling block?
I never said you did. I said you "seem" to have the opinion. And again, you fail to answer my question.


It may be one issue among many, as I've pointed out above, but it is representative of many other problems resulting from the same issue - lower packing density but with a heavier overall weight.
I have addressed those points.


Didn't you? Are you going to tell me you actually thought I was being sarcastic to Publius and thought it was important to point that out?
I did say "sound". If you took it as an accusation, I'm sorry, that was not my intent. I did think it was an interesting point of conversation though.


I was stating that I had never seen a Sacagawea dollar coin, nothing more, nothing less. In that statement to Publius I made no remark about the Sacagawea dollar coin that could be construed as a decision with regard to which facts were of any relevance, much less whether I have a good feel for them or not.
You were talking earlier about coin design and weights and how awful a new coin can be. The Sacagawea dollar is a physical real-life design directly related to that discussion as an example of what a coin can be like.

Ok, so "don't knock it" may have been out of place for me to say. I still hold it up as a valid example though.


If you are going to argue that your comment about the weight of the coin supports some point in its favor, for its ability to be distinguished from other coins by feel alone, my response is that it makes no difference or else it would have made a difference and would be of greater circulation.
I made that point directly in earlier posts about it's weight and feel. (in addition, refer to my comment about design vs method)

Then, I'll answer the same answer I've given to the same argument so far: others by context and I, by explicit statement, are talking about a future coin design, one which might succeed where others have not. If, on the other hand, you actually think that the Sacagawea and the Susan B. Anthony dollar coins have been successful, then make your case.
Where did you reference a possible future coin design? A lot of this discussion has been about the negatives of having a coin, not about the design of a coin. (again, refer to my comment about design vs method).

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-06, 12:23 AM
The past designs for a US dollar coin were successful? I don't see them in circulation, so that seems to suggest they were/are, in fact, not successful.

They haven't been successful, but it's nothing to do with the design of the coin, it's because the government keeps printing dollar bills. The successful model is that of Canada, which killed the bills as they introduced the coins. This has been explained to you over and over.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-06, 02:28 AM
They haven't been successful, but it's nothing to do with the design of the coin, it's because the government keeps printing dollar bills.


They would be successful if people were given no choice? That's a strange definition of "successful."

I don't like the dollar coins. I can at least tell the colored ones aren't quarters, but they're far too heavy. Given a choice, I will keep using dollar bills.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-06, 02:39 AM
By the way, dollar coins are in circulation and available, just not very popular. I recently noticed I had one of the quarter lookalikes (same color, almost the same size). I really hate those.

Solfe
2012-Apr-06, 03:10 AM
By the way, dollar coins are in circulation and available, just not very popular. I recently noticed I had one of the quarter lookalikes (same color, almost the same size). I really hate those.

You can pick those up at the post office stamp vending machines. They give coins back for change. Pay with a twenty, you can get a handful of them back.

I like them, but if someone handed me a hand full of coins, I wouldn't expect the quarter sized things to be anything other than quarters.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-06, 04:13 AM
They would be successful if people were given no choice? That's a strange definition of "successful."

I don't like the dollar coins. I can at least tell the colored ones aren't quarters, but they're far too heavy. Given a choice, I will keep using dollar bills.

It's Currency. People aren't meant to have a choice with it; in fact a choice of a Nation's currency only introduce's confusion both with the local's and tourists/visitors. It's obvious that in order for the USDollar Coin to become more than a Franklin Mint collectable, a decent coin has to be introduced AND the bill has to be removed. Otherwise people won't use it. (That said, from the sounds of it, the current fad dollar coin sounds like it doesn't work. Part of the strength of the Loonie and Toonie when they came out was that they were obvious in your change pile. )

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-06, 07:58 AM
It's Currency. People aren't meant to have a choice with it; in fact a choice of a Nation's currency only introduce's confusion both with the local's and tourists/visitors.


The argument was that if only they were forced on us they would be "successful." A lot of things can be "successful" if people are forced to use them. But that makes a mockery of the word "successful."


It's obvious that in order for the USDollar Coin to become more than a Franklin Mint collectable, a decent coin has to be introduced AND the bill has to be removed. Otherwise people won't use it.


Which makes my point, I think.

NEOWatcher
2012-Apr-06, 01:54 PM
Ara Pacis (and anyone else interested in the discussion):
I feel that we have considerably derailed the thread.

I also think that we may be arguing two different ideas which is causing a confusion in what we are bantering about and causing friction between us.

So; To get things straightened out, I decided to start anew by clearly stating my opinion and doing it in a different thread.
I haven't brought our current discussion into it because I want to start with a clean slate and hopefully clear statement of my view before discussing anything that we have miscommunicated on. I am open (and appreciate) for you to include any points we discussed here in that thread.

Over here: The US Dollar Coin (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130444-The-US-Dollar-Coin)

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-06, 07:58 PM
They haven't been successful, but it's nothing to do with the design of the coin, it's because the government keeps printing dollar bills. The successful model is that of Canada, which killed the bills as they introduced the coins. This has been explained to you over and over.And it has been explained that resistance prevented that from happening. Yes, the US government did not retire the dollar bill at the same time. Would that speed up/force adoption. Almost certainly. Why didn't the US government do that?

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-06, 10:46 PM
I saw you started a new thread, but I haven't read it yet. Since you said you want that clean, I'll address this post here.


I'm not talking about what the US did or what the US is doing. I'm talking about adopting a model that has worked for others.
I have repeatedly referred to the Canadian model, and you are continually questioning my comments by basing it on the failed US model. This results in you taking my statements out of context and evading the questions by referring to your own idea. What questions am I evading? What idea of my own am I referring to? You're the one saying it will work, arguing to change the status quo, so the burden of evidence is upon you, not me. By trying to put the burden on me, shows that you are being evasive, not me. Don't you understand the basic rules of argumentation? I shouldn't have to do your job for you.


Let me rephrase the question that you failed to answer by replacing the pronouns with nouns to make it a much clearer.
Why couldn't the US follow the Canadian model which has already shown to work for them?
What difference is there in the US people rather than the Canadian people that would change the way the Canadian model would work in the US?That's a good question... So, why haven't you addressed it? It's your proposal. Tell me what it is about Americans that is similar enough to Canadians to make such a proposal succeed?


Because I believe the design issue has been solved and it's the US model which is based on "hoping it catches on" is what is failing now. As others here have mentioned, they don't think the design issue has been solved. I agree, the "hope" is doomed to failure.


How many times do I have to repeat... I'm talking about the history of the Canadian model which should be adopted by the US.Repeating is the problem. You need to stop repeating it and actually explain how it is applicable to the US, which is the issue under discussion.


Canadian.Canada is not the US. It should have been obvious that my comment was referring to successes that have occurred the US.


I never said it wouldn't cost money. I'm just of the opinion that the amount is minor.
And, in many cases a delay in cost does save money. Businesses do replace thier equipment on occasion. So; it can be as temporary as they are willing to do, and if it's temporary until the next equipment modification then it has saved money.That's a good point, with regard to equipment which is changeable, such as cash-drawer trays. How applicable is it to safes or armored trucks?


I don't doubt that those situations will exist, but I am of the opinion that it is not a big issue because (wait for it...) it wasn't a problem when it happened in Canada. Again, I'm using a real life example to base my opinion on.Again, you're failing to explain why what happened in Canada is applicable to the US. Since we're talking about size and mass and packing density, please perform the calculations for cash-flow, load limits for safes, armored trucks, roads (etc) and miles traveled and fuel use and cost (etc) using both Canadian bill-replacement coins and known US dollar coins and actually demonstrate that you're right instead of merely insisting it.


That's between you and her. I have already stated clearly that I am commenting based on my own observations and not from an authoritative background. So please leave me out of any "authority" comments.You invoked her name by saying "Two of us have told you this is not an issue of authority". If you don't want me to keep arguing statements you make that are factually incorrect, then please stop making statements that are factually incorrect.


So, you think I have a motive? No; I don't. Because if it's a drawer change, our company will not be involved. We deal in high volume new installations. In fact, the drawers are given to us by our customers and never go through our inventory.

My motive is helping the government save money. I am willing to accept a dollar coin if it saves money, and I don't have to sift through a bunch of crumpled torn dirty bills to find one that works in a vending machine.Okay, I'll just take your word for it.


Yes, it's a direct analogy, not a direct comparison. Something for me to base my opinion on.I don't want to argue semantics, though you seem to like it instead of addressing the actual issue under discussion. Call it whatever you want, you need to actually demonstrate how the relationship exists and applies to the discussion. You think it's analogous? Fine, prove it.


"Our population is 9-10 times larger, our economy is larger"
Yes; that also means we have a larger volume of currency creation that we can save money on. Pluses and minuses on both sides.What are the other pluses and minuses? I can think of some, such as those already mentioned, like "it will magnify the transition costs by 9-10 times. What effect on the probability of a transition do you think that will have?


"our politics is fierce and our media play up even small differences of opinion with more effect because of this. "
Yes; but it's also two sided. The balance may remain the same but just louder.You think so? Can you explain your analysis?


"US money is used throughout the world, not just in digital terms as a reserve currency but directly in many locations either as or in opposition to local currency. The total population that uses US currency is therefore much larger. A lot of that is in higher denomination bills, but some is smaller. "
Where is it used in such small denominations as the $1 bill and to what extent?
I have heard that US currency is valued in other countries, but I usually hear that in relation to larger denominations.
Countries that have Officially Dollarized using US currency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollarization#U.S._dollar) (wikipedia).

Countries using the U.S. dollar exclusively
British Virgin Islands
Caribbean Netherlands (from 1 January 2011)
East Timor (uses its own coins)
Ecuador (uses its own coins in addition to U.S. coins; Ecuador adopted the U.S. dollar as its legal tender in 2000. [44]
El Salvador
Marshall Islands
Federated States of Micronesia (Micronesia used the U.S. dollar since 1944 [45])
Palau (Palau adopted the U.S. dollar since 1944 [46])
Panama (uses its own coins in addition to U.S. coins. This country has adopted the U.S. dollar as legal tender since 1904). [47]
Turks and Caicos Islands

Countries using the U.S. dollar alongside other currencies
Bahamas
Uruguay[48]
Nicaragua
Cambodia (uses Cambodian Riel for many official transactions but most businesses deal exclusively in dollars)
Lebanon (along with the Lebanese pound)
Liberia (was fully dollarized until 1982 the year the National Bank of Liberia started to issue five dollar coins [49] ; U.S. dollar still in common usage alongside Liberian dollar)
Zimbabwe
Haiti uses the U.S Dollar alongside its domestic currency called "Gourde"
Vietnam (along with the Vietnamese Dong)


"If we get rid of the US dollar bill, we may see fewer users overseas as they wear out and then we can either start shipping larger, heavier loads of dollar coins if they still want them, or let their reliance on the US wane and risk losing US influence overseas."
We will also see it wear out much slower which greatly reduces the need to ship. Besides, the shipping is cheap based on some of the cheap heavy items that I see in the stores that were made overseas.This is a good point. Coins are easier to counterfeit, but if we stick to a small denomination it may not be an issue.


"It may not be a major change... or maybe it will be, but are you willing to risk global stability over it?"
My opinion is that the risk is small. We have done far worse things to other countries with no global stability problems. I think currency valuation and market fluctuations are much more of a problem than denomination design.You know, there's a difference between arguing whether something can happen (or not) and whether we should care if something happens. Can you show some evidence or analysis as to why your opinion that the risk is small should be accepted as valid?


Then put a smiley on it before you accuse me of not following along. Your comment with no context of seriousness was an accusation as read.You seem to be laboring under the delusion that this sub-thread was of my doing. No, this was based on you referring to another thread where I suggest making a change to another system and you trying to suggest that I'm hypocritical as an ad hominem. I responded by pointing out the differences in the systems and the differences in the proposals and how a similar type or proposal in the system under discussion here would exist. Then, I illustrated that I would not be hypocritical because I actually would not object to that alteration to the system. That lack of objection, however, should not be construed as support or a proposal for such a change to actually occur. As should be obvious to anyone who was following the sub-thread (which of all people should include you), that I was "not serious" in suggesting such a proposal refers to the intent of demonstrating the flaw in your fallacy and was not, in fact, an attempt at humor wherein a smiley would be applicable. That you consider my statement to which this is your reply as an accusation of not following along, you are correct. I accuse you of not following along since it seems obvious that you don't understand the context of my statements as having originated in and being a continuation of a line of discussion from an absurd notion put forward by you.


I never said you did. I said you "seem" to have the opinion. And again, you fail to answer my question.Continuing my last thought, not only should you "follow along", but you should read ahead. It strikes me as particularly useless for you to claim I don't answer a question that I address in the very next sentence.


I have addressed those points.Hand-waving them away should not be confused with actually addressing them.


I did say "sound". If you took it as an accusation, I'm sorry, that was not my intent. I did think it was an interesting point of conversation though.

You were talking earlier about coin design and weights and how awful a new coin can be. The Sacagawea dollar is a physical real-life design directly related to that discussion as an example of what a coin can be like.

Ok, so "don't knock it" may have been out of place for me to say. I still hold it up as a valid example though.

I made that point directly in earlier posts about it's weight and feel. (in addition, refer to my comment about design vs method)Okay, we can talk about it in context of this discussion if you want to make it relevant. My point is that (aside from not ascribing emotionality that I didn't have) you need to actually state your points and how they relate to the discussion, especially if you want it to support your over-all argument. I don't want to have to connect your dots because I might do it wrong and then it seems like I'm putting words in your mouth.

(to be continued)

Ara Pacis
2012-Apr-06, 10:48 PM
Continued, to answer your last point with links and quotes by others about what we really are talking about.


Where did you reference a possible future coin design? A lot of this discussion has been about the negatives of having a coin, not about the design of a coin. (again, refer to my comment about design vs method).Do I really need to link to each of my posts where I ask about size, mass, packing density or color or design? If you read what others have written, it's not just the negatives of having a coin, but actual negatives of having had the coins that were in actual circulation. If extant coin designs are the problem, then a new coin design is part of the solution. I started talking to you in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004401#post2004401) about new coin designs by using an analogy with fruit, remember? I even wrote something earlier in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2003522#post2003522), on page 1, where I imply that I'm referring to a new coin design by explaining how choices in size and weight would be a source of confusion.

SeanF understood that when he explicitely translates that for you in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004433#post2004433)
If I may be so bold as to speak for Ara, quarters have always been coins, never bills, and a dollar coin would probably be different in size/weight than a quarter. Therefore, Ara suspects that looking at how cash registers/tellers handle quarters doesn't tell us much about how they would handle a hypothetical dollar coin. (bold mine)

And I follow up with an explicit statement in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004439#post2004439)
A Dollar coin may not be the same size as a quarter, it may be larger.

And then Publius responds in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004477#post2004477)
To do it right, the new dollar coin (that would be used) needs to be readily identifiable as different from every other coin. We could make it smaller than a quarter, but to make it work, it would need to be easily distinguished. I'd go with a different color, making it gold or tan looking, and try to give it some distinctive feel. Let's see, I think the current presidential and Sacagawea coins are brass colored, but they have a tendency to tarnish, especially on the raised areas.(bold mine)

Nowhere Man states in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004525#post2004525)
I wish the US would drop the dollar bill (and the two-dollar bill), and start making one- and two-dollar coins.Since we don't have a two-dollar coin (to my knowledge) that involves at least one new design and since he's not referring to extant designs, the one-dollar coin reference might mean a new design by context.

And DonM435 made a similar statement even earlier, in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2003333#post2003333), on page 1:
I'd also replace the $5 and $1 with coins, and just maintain 50c and 10c pieces.

Also, on page 1, Buttercup, in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2003379#post2003379), implies a design change is needed:
And besides, the newest coin dollars look too much, at quick glance, like a quarter; they're not golden-colored enough.

And then in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2004763#post2004763), I make it plain as day
We're talking about the differences between US quarters and an imaginary US dollar coin.

Yes, I can see that as early as page 1, when you attack Buttercup in this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/130084-Canada-bye-bye-penny?p=2003404#post2003404), that you are referring to extant (US?) dollar coin designs. However, it should be clear from the statements by others that they were not.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-06, 11:50 PM
And it has been explained that resistance prevented that from happening. Yes, the US government did not retire the dollar bill at the same time. Would that speed up/force adoption. Almost certainly. Why didn't the US government do that?

Cowardice on the part of 535 elected individuals. As has been noted earlier.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-07, 02:53 AM
Cowardice on the part of 535 elected individuals. As has been noted earlier.

That's just bizarre. Why is it cowardly to follow the wishes of the people who elected them? Why should they be forcing these things on us in the first place?

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-07, 02:59 AM
The argument was that if only they were forced on us they would be "successful." A lot of things can be "successful" if people are forced to use them. But that makes a mockery of the word "successful."
Which makes my point, I think.
Successful means fulfilling the criterion for success. In terms of replacing a note with a coin, the criterion for success is the general adaption of it for use. That it happens without tool much pain is a bonus.

It's the lack of will to do what's needed to make them a success that made the previous ones failures.

And making them in a size and color that marks them as distinct is part of that, going with a previously failed design, which failed in part because of the design, will make the switch more painful than it needs to be.

Anyway, seeing how you still haven't joined the modern world on measurements, I don't doubt it's going to take a long time to get this change done unless you hit a runaway inflation event and have to remake all the money anyway.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-07, 04:23 AM
That's just bizarre. Why is it cowardly to follow the wishes of the people who elected them? Why should they be forcing these things on us in the first place?
Because it's the better choice even though you're too stubborn to admit it. (Note, collective you, not personal you)

That's actually one of the functions of government, making the best choices even though they're unpopular. This seems to have been lost in many modern societies.

SeanF
2012-Apr-07, 04:45 AM
Because it's the better choice even though you're too stubborn to admit it.
Who says it's "the better choice"? This is a question of cost vs convenience, isn't it? Whether or not any given convenience is sufficient to warrant any given cost is not an objective truth - it's purely a matter of opinion.

And the only opinion that matters is that of the people who have to bear the cost, which in this case is the American people as a whole.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-07, 06:39 AM
Because it's the better choice even though you're too stubborn to admit it. (Note, collective you, not personal you)


Better? Not by our measure. You haven't even hinted at a reason that they should be forced on people despite the fact that they don't want them.

They're just stupid coins. What in the world is the big deal about this?

publius
2012-Apr-07, 08:05 AM
They're just stupid coins. What in the world is the big deal about this?

Money. :) As I said upthread, if I were in Congress, I'd vote to force the change, even though I'd hate myself for it because I personally prefer the bills.

The trouble is the $1 bill just costs too much to maintain. It costs roughly 9.1 cents per bill to print (it does vary a bit with denomination because of the differences, but it's not all that much), and its average lifetime is 22 months. Thus the cost of production is roughly 10% of the face value and it must replaced in less than two years. THere are roughly $10B worth of physical $1s in circulation. That is 1/3 of the total of physical FRNs, but only about 1% of the value of the that physical FRN supply, which is now a smidge over $1T.

Now here's the annual production figures for the BEP:

http://www.moneyfactory.gov/uscurrency/annualproductionfigures.html

Note that $1 bills make up the plurality of all the bills printed, except for FY 2010, which was a big change and I wonder if the Crisis caused some change in the rate $1s were being used. It will be interesting to see what FY 2011 is.

Now, the average lifetime of a coin in the US is 25 years. Thus, when you consider all this, using $1 bills is a huge waste. Every single deficit reduction commission of which there have been legion over my life, and nothing done, recommends getting rid of the $1 bill as a cost saving measure. It's chump change compared to the federal budget, but you've got to start somewhere and take every cost saving measure you can. The hour is getting late now, and I personally think we've crossed the fiscal event horizon. Getting rid of the $1 bill will be nothing compared to what's coming with a Greek style debt crisis.

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-07, 02:11 PM
Exactly. The government is wasting money by maintaining the $1 bill. And the Congress (and President, as well) are supposed to be doing what's right for the country, not just blindly following the wishes of the electorate, many of whom would wish to pay no taxes at all while still receiving all the services.

Getting a little too political now, sorry.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-07, 04:18 PM
Better? Not by our measure. You haven't even hinted at a reason that they should be forced on people despite the fact that they don't want them.

They're just stupid coins. What in the world is the big deal about this?
Keeping the bills is wasting taxpayers' money. Doesn't that normally trump everything else?

Trebuchet
2012-Apr-07, 04:30 PM
Keeping the bills is wasting taxpayers money. Doesn't that normally trump everything else?
Unfortunately, no. But it probably should.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-07, 06:41 PM
There are far more significant ways to reduce spending. And by this argument, why not just stop printing bills and stamping coins altogether? Force people to use electronic money. Never mind that many people would not want it. It saves money, so that should trump everything.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-07, 07:12 PM
Once you get to too high denominations coins fail due to being too easy to counterfeight

SeanF
2012-Apr-07, 10:09 PM
Keeping the bills is wasting taxpayers' money. Doesn't that normally trump everything else?
You're still falsely presuming objectivity. It's only "wasting money" if the added convenience is not worth the added cost, and that's subjective.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Apr-08, 12:06 AM
Thing is that the objection isn't about the inconvenience of having them, it's all about the inconvenience of changing habits. Having lived through it, I'm looking at this from a point after the conversion, based on actually experiencing it. You're arguing from ignorance. I live in a country where the cutoff point in value between coins and bills is just below five dollars and I'd hate to go back.

You guys only think you'll need vast stacks of one dollar coins because you don't want to use your two dollar bills.
Get both changed at the same time and you'll soon realize what you've been missing for several decades. I'll admit that this does presuppose that the majority of Americans are capable of adding two's as well as counting one's, which I'm assuming because I'd rather believe it's stubbornness than stupidity that's holding you back.

SeanF
2012-Apr-08, 01:16 AM
No-one is arguing from ignorance. Having had both options is enough to know which option one prefers. It is not necessary to be restricted to one particular option in order to know that one would prefer not to be restricted to that one particular option.

I would not be very optimistic if someone told me we were going to completely eliminate the dollar bill, but could bring it back if we decide we don't like it. I don't think "You've got to pass it to see what's in it" is going to work anymore. :)

And you appear to be arguing from arrogance. It's not generally very effective.

Parrothead
2012-Apr-08, 06:16 PM
I'm not too concerned about the penny going. Prices only get rounded, if paying cash. I'm assuming the logical thing will be rounding after taxes, otherwise people can get dinged twice. This may be something to keep an eye out for, once the change is implemented. If paying by debit/credit card or cheque (I'm guessing these may disappear soon), no rounding takes place.

As others stated, the switch over to loonies and toonies, wasn't too bad. The gov't introduced the coins as they discontinued $1 and $2 paper bills. Where I worked at the time, we used the spare change slot for loonies. By the time the toonies were introduced, I don't recall if we just had a small box in part of a spare bill slot or we just received a differently configured tray. I haven't found a problem with the weight of coins, I keep a few in my pockets, a few loose in the car and anything else gets left in containers at home. The gov't announced earlier that they will be changing composition of loonies and toonies, from a nickel to steel core, making them a bit lighter and cheaper to produce.

SeanF
2012-Apr-10, 03:27 PM
I get the impression it's not really inconveniences per se, but rather inconveniences that require people to learn something new or change their habits of though which really trigger the stubbornness in the people.
Why is it so difficult to believe that other people might have priorities and preferences which, although different than yours, are not borne out of simple stubbornness or stupidity? I really don't get it.

Delvo
2012-Apr-10, 10:56 PM
I'm not too concerned about the penny going. Prices only get rounded, if paying cash.OK, although context tells me you might have meant that last sentence as a prediction of the result of a lack of pennies, which hasn't happened yet, the fact that it's conjugated in present tense makes me think you might be talking about the way it's already been lately. So, do you mean that it's already been routine or standard for Canooks to ignore one-cent differences, so that if you see something technically priced at $22.99, you all pay $23 and don't collect the $0.01 in change?... so the price is essentially $23 anyway?

If you're only talking about a prediction for after the pennies are all gone, how do you mean it will work: that the price labels will be changed (to actually say $23, for example, or maybe $22.90 or $22.95), or that people will just start ignoring them as I described above, just taking the occasional $0.01 loss as a natural result of paying in cash, as if it were a fee?

Of course, where I've always lived, tax isn't included in the label price, so the amount you pay including tax could end with any digit and you could end up gaining or losing up to four cents at a time if the prices remained the same and nobody traded pennies, but the above examples were intended to keep it simple. :)

What I've long thought my country should do is not merely stop producing certain coins, but also stop indicating prices in such small units. The same arguments that can be given against pennies are also applicable to nickels now, so the smallest-value coins that still make sense are dimes. Then dealing with the rounding would be a convenient matter of just not using that last digit anymore when expressing prices; $22.99 would become $22.9 ($23.0 is closer, but businesses would still think the same way they do now in setting prices, and that includes a rule of staying just barely under the line whenever another digit would otherwise get bumped up such as from 2 to 3). This would also mean eliminating quarters, but a fifty-cent coin could be reintroduced. I'd also be happy with making the smallest denominator something even bigger than a dime, such as twenty or fifty cents or even just whole dollars; that would also be precedented because a dime right now is worth about what a half-penny was when we ended them.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-10, 11:49 PM
No, when this takes effect, for digital purchases (with debit cards/credit cards/non-cash purchases) then the purchase + applicable taxes will still be to the cent.

But if you pay by cash, the FINAL value will be rounded to the closest 5cent.

Some vendors may try to adjust pricing to get close to the 5 naturally, but as someone else pointed out, selling by weight/volume will make that hard.

I don't think we'll round to the nearest tenth until we get rid of the nickel too, which isn't on the table any time soon as far as I've heard.

LunarOrbit
2012-Apr-14, 11:19 PM
I don't like the dollar coins. I can at least tell the colored ones aren't quarters, but they're far too heavy. Given a choice, I will keep using dollar bills.

I'm amazed that so many people complain about the difficulty of distinguishing between a dollar coin and a quarter, but don't seem to mind that you can't distinguish between a $1 bill and larger denomination bills by touch at all. What would upset you more if you were visually impaired: accidentally giving someone a $1 coin instead of a quarter, or accidentally giving them a $10 (or $20, $50, $100) bill when you meant to give them a $1 bill?

That was one of the big selling points when we (Canadians) brought in the Loonie and Twoonie. Our $1 and $2 coins are thicker and have larger diameters (making them heavier) than our quarters, and our quarters have a textured edge. There is absolutely no mistaking a Loonie for a quarter. Loonies and Twoonies are more similar to each other, but the Twoonie has the inner center coin that is easy enough to distinguish by touch alone.

Canadian bills have Braille on them, but that can't be very reliable. The corners of the bills can be ripped off, or the Braille dots can be worn off.

As for the weight of the coins, you can do what I do: collect your coins at home and bring them to the bank when you get enough to roll. If I carry coins at all it's usually less than $5 worth.

SeanF
2012-Apr-15, 12:31 AM
I'm amazed that so many people complain about the difficulty of distinguishing between a dollar coin and a quarter, but don't seem to mind that you can't distinguish between a $1 bill and larger denomination bills by touch at all.
Most Americans are sighted, and have spent their entire lives distinguishing their currency visually. Even the size difference in the coins is used as a visual cue to their value.

The Susan B. Anthony dollar, on the other hand, was difficult to distinguish from a quarter not only by touch, but also by sight. For a sighted person, quickly distinguishing between a $1 and a $5 bill was considerably easier than doing so with an SBA and a quarter. The fact that the US government did not make the SBA more distinctive in appearance easily justified some extra complaining - there's nothing amazing there. :)

If you think anybody's using the fact that the SBA was difficult to distinguish from the quarter as an argument against dollar coins in general, I think you're misreading things.


As for the weight of the coins, you can do what I do: collect your coins at home and bring them to the bank when you get enough to roll. If I carry coins at all it's usually less than $5 worth.
Yes, there are lots of different inconvenient ways to deal with the inconvenience of dollar coins. :)

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-15, 08:02 AM
If you think anybody's using the fact that the SBA was difficult to distinguish from the quarter as an argument against dollar coins in general, I think you're misreading things.


Yes, that is just one of the reasons I dislike them.



Yes, there are lots of different inconvenient ways to deal with the inconvenience of dollar coins. :)

And one obvious convenient way. :)

Rough Edges
2012-Apr-15, 08:55 AM
Since the thread about Canadian pennies is now mostly about US dollars . . .

I like the dollar coins, but I hardly ever come across them. I think the only place I may ever have received them is as change from machines at public transit or parking.

Haven't been to the US in a while, so maybe it is different now.

DonM435
2012-Apr-15, 01:45 PM
I used to keep any $2 bills or $1 coins around the house as emergency money. I didn't like to use these, because the cashiers might be surprised, or would at least waste time commenting on them. So, I figured they'd always be around for when I needed a few dollars and was willing to endure the quizzicality.

My wife and son, however, would grab these and spend them routinely, for anything, so that plan stopped working once I had acquired a family.

LunarOrbit
2012-Apr-15, 07:06 PM
Most Americans are sighted, and have spent their entire lives distinguishing their currency visually.

I can pull any coin out of my pocket based only on touch. If I need $1.50 for a vending machine I can quickly reach into my pocket and fish out a Loonie and two quarters with no problems. I don't need to be visually impaired to see the value of having coins for small denominations.


The Susan B. Anthony dollar, on the other hand, was difficult to distinguish from a quarter not only by touch, but also by sight.

I don't think a design flaw for one particular coin should be what decides whether or not a $1 coin is a good idea or not. If the SBA was difficult to distinguish then redesign it.


For a sighted person, quickly distinguishing between a $1 and a $5 bill was considerably easier than doing so with an SBA and a quarter.

I don't think a minor inconvenience for me or other sighted people is a good justification for continuing to limit the independence of visually impaired people. If they can't go to a store to buy a loaf of bread without someone they trust accompanying them to ensure they pay with the correct bills then that is a major inconvenience to them, far worse than you trying to distinguish between a SBA dollar and a quarter.


Yes, there are lots of different inconvenient ways to deal with the inconvenience of dollar coins. :)

If collecting dollar coins at home, rolling them, and then bringing them to the bank is the inconvenience that prevents people from accepting the dollar coin, then why don't you replace all of your coins with bills? It is the pennies, nickels, and dimes that pile up in a bowl in my home, not the quarters, loonies, or twoonies because I'll sometimes actually use those.

SeanF
2012-Apr-15, 09:04 PM
I don't think a minor inconvenience for me or other sighted people is a good justification for continuing to limit the independence of visually impaired people.
The problem of the visually impaired distinguishing currency is wholly unrelated to the question of replacing dollar bills with coins. Making the bills (including the $1) different sizes would alleviate the problem with the visually impaired, and the SBA itself is proof that replacing the $1 bill with a $1 coin would not automatically alleviate the problem. The two issues have absolutely nothing to do with one another, and preferring to keep the dollar bill doesn't indicate any kind of animosity towards the visually impaired.


If collecting dollar coins at home, rolling them, and then bringing them to the bank is the inconvenience that prevents people from accepting the dollar coin, then why don't you replace all of your coins with bills? It is the pennies, nickels, and dimes that pile up in a bowl in my home, not the quarters, loonies, or twoonies because I'll sometimes actually use those.
Why? I don't roll pennies, nickels, dimes, or quarters and bring them to the bank, I just carry them with me and spend them. But I usually only have one or two of each coin, and they are smaller and lighter than what a putative dollar coin would be.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-15, 09:14 PM
There is a US Dollar coin discussion going on a few threads down FYI. :P But anyways, it seems to me that given how few of those coins you might normally get (at most 4 of them for change at a time), the weight issue shouldn't really be an issue; assuming you use them normally. You would (should) be using them for your small purchases so they shouldn't build up unless you purposefully let them build up.

The few times I tend to get a lot of coins, the weight of the pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters tend to outweigh the toonies and loonies I have.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-15, 11:26 PM
There is a US Dollar coin discussion going on a few threads down FYI. :P But anyways, it seems to me that given how few of those coins you might normally get (at most 4 of them for change at a time), the weight issue shouldn't really be an issue; assuming you use them normally.


Weight and bulk are both issues. Dollar bills can add up: You get a some here, you get some there, and if the cashier is out of fives, you can definitely get more than four at one time. The difference with coins is that they are more inconvenient to carry, so you go to more trouble to avoid carrying them.

Taeolas
2012-Apr-16, 12:33 AM
In theory yes, in practice, that isn't as much of an issue as you make it out to be; no more than quarters are as big a problem now. After all if the clerk runs out of 1$ bills, then you may need to get all the change in quarters. In theory that's a problem; in practice that happens relatively rarely. Granted having a 2$ denomination helps a lot in that respect too. And as myself and others have attested to, when you have 1$ coins, the level dividing when you reach for the bills vs reaching for coins tends to be higher with 1$ coins, which also keeps coins down a bit.

Van Rijn
2012-Apr-16, 01:04 AM
In theory yes, in practice, that isn't as much of an issue as you make it out to be; no more than quarters are as big a problem now.


In practice, quarters are bulky now. I don't want to extend that on to dollars. I've had enough of them to see what it would be like, and I don't want it.



And as myself and others have attested to, when you have 1$ coins, the level dividing when you reach for the bills vs reaching for coins tends to be higher with 1$ coins, which also keeps coins down a bit.

Which just makes my point about their inconvenience.

Taeolas
2012-May-03, 04:33 PM
Just an update, as the Last penny is being minted on May 4th. (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/05/03/mb-last-penny-mint.html)

NEOWatcher
2012-Sep-12, 04:15 PM
Instead of starting a new thread (because this just sounds like a blip in the topic), I'm adding this here.

This is the second story that I heard where some business is banning pennies.
The Cent Makes No Sense, VT Store Bans Pennies (http://www.fox44abc22yourvoice.com/story/19521675/the-cent-makes-no-sense-vt-store-bans-pennies?hpt=us_bn7)
It seems like nobody has an issue with rounding with this store. Earlier, there was a big controversy about a store (Chipotle?) doing the rounding.
I guess the difference could be the size of the purchase.

HenrikOlsen
2013-May-11, 05:00 PM
Ideally, it should cost more to make a coin than its face value, while its metal value should be less.
Otherwise, counterfeiting is trivially profitable.

They earn back the money it cost to make them by enabling the trades they're involved in.

Ronald Brak
2013-May-11, 06:33 PM
After reading through this thread my solution is that the International Astronomer Union should decide whether or not to keep the penny and the mint should decide whether or not Pluto is a planet.

Trebuchet
2013-May-12, 12:24 AM
Instead of starting a new thread (because this just sounds like a blip in the topic), I'm adding this here.

This is the second story that I heard where some business is banning pennies.
The Cent Makes No Sense, VT Store Bans Pennies (http://www.fox44abc22yourvoice.com/story/19521675/the-cent-makes-no-sense-vt-store-bans-pennies?hpt=us_bn7)
It seems like nobody has an issue with rounding with this store. Earlier, there was a big controversy about a store (Chipotle?) doing the rounding.
I guess the difference could be the size of the purchase.

Makes cents to me! (Runs and hides)