no word yet is the mint gonna change the composition for nickel and cent. why they are not talking this time?. is it the metal came down?.
I think they are trying to pass legislation to allow the mint to be more versatile and change the composition of coins as the metals fluctuate. We shall see.
The point of having coins is so that they are backed by something (metal) not just our government if you make a penny worth $.001 and the US dollar goes to trash then you have nothing. I think we should all carry around money chains like they did way back.
A chain made of gold or silver links of uniform size. Payments could be made by twisting off however many links you needed.
I would counter that Gresham's law is only a natural response by people to government fraud throughout history. Whenever a government debases the currency, which is practically all of the time, people will save the most valuable coin and spend the less valuable. But if a coin and currency retained their same value/weight throughout time, no coins would be removed from circulation. When a dollar was defined as a weight of silver, the silver dollar could never be worth more or less than a dollar of silver. When there was a shift first to the gold standard, then to the paper standard, this link was broken. Now, we've reached the point where many people believe the ideal coin should have no value other than it's legal fiat value. Quite a change. Edit: And it is equally true that having a fiat currency hasn't worked, not even once in the last 3,000 years or so - but people today are about to relearn the lesson.
I've heard plans about making ceramic coins, and that they are more durable, lighter, last much longer and can have chip put in them (probably in larger denoms) to prevent counterfitting. It was on a show on the science channel that was about the near future, and how they would still have a need for currency,
Not true at all. There has never been a coin in this country, or any other throughout recorded time, where it's intrinsic value equaled its face value.
now now thats going a bit too far in india alone in 1938 the rupees face value was greater than its intrinsic value and that met with disastrous consequences. another such tragedy happened with the 1 paisa coins shortly after independence that issue also lasted a year. those efforts are bound to fail i agree though. one also has to realize the intrinsic value is also a made up number
intrinsic value intrinsic value of nickel and cent were already below its face value. maybe the cost to produce them will be very high.
spock I will grant you that you may have a valid exception. And elaine, you definitely have one - never even thought of it. But those exceptions were only for limited periods of time because of temporary changes in the value of metals. But the point I am making is this - even the earliest mints practiced seniorage. The intrinsic value of the coin's metal was always lower than the face value of the coin.
The Coinage Act of 1792 defined a "dollar" as 371.25 grains of fine silver. So the intrinsic value of the dollar equalled the face value since they were one and the same thing. The only time the intrinsic value can differ from the face value is when the dollar is valued by some characteristic other than the weight of the metal by which the coin is defined. So it turns out that there has been a coin in this country equal to face value. Edit: I would also disagree that seniorage is part of intrinsic value. It is the additional manufacturing cost for turning silver into coin form, but 371.25 grains of silver was equal to $1 before and after it was put into coin form.
Cloud - you misunderstand. Yes they said that there were to be 371.25 grains of silver in a dollar - a minted dollar. But that does not mean that 371.25 grains of silver cost a dollar. At that time, 371.25 grains of silver cost leass than $1. There have been times throughout our nations history that the value of silver dropped to such a point for a short while that the amount of silver in a dollar was actually worth less than $1. But for the vast majority of time that was not the case. Had it been, no nation on earth would have been able to afford to mint their own coins. In the $10 gold coins for example - there was not $10 worth of gold. And that's what seniorage is. It is the profit that a mint makes by minting the coins. You are right, seniorage has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of a coin. For example, if silver cost a $1 an ounce, they would put 3/4 of an ounce of silver in a $1 coin. If gold was $22 an ounce, they would put .97 ounces of gold in a $20 gold coin. That's seniorage.
trade dollar i loved trade dollar. which is heavier that morgan dollar. any foreign silver dollar heavier. i will like them too. anyway american eagle silver dollar is the best. the only different is eagle is minted within these few years.
Almost true but usually the intrinstic value was VERY close to the face value, usually not more than 1% less. And in 1853 when they made th half dime, dime, quarter and half dollar subsidiary coins with an intrinsic value several percent below the face value they deliberately left the dollar coin alone and its intrinsic value was GREATER than it's face value. The dollars of 1853 to 1873 contained about $1.04 worth of silver. Initially the trade dollars intrinsic value was also greater than the face value. And on the early US coins the cost of production of the gold and silver coins was greater than the tiny seniorage on them. The Mint depended on the Seniorage from th copper coinage to pay the expenses of the gold and silver coinage.
When I said earliest mints Conder I was not talking about the US Mint. Yes, there were certainly exceptions for US coins as I mentioned and you noted. And yes, the intrinsic value of even early coins was close to face value - but it was less than face value. This was true in all of the European mints, even true for the Romans and Greeks.
cent & nickel i also like to see 100% stainless steel coins. just the the italian coinage before. very beautiful designed.
I haven't seen anything posted here that would make the above statement untrue. It's all arguing over the tree and missing the forest, point being that people have forgotten that a coin with intrinsic value is superior to one that has none, or little.
canadian dollar coin can anyone figure it out how much is the intrinsic value of canadian dollar coin?. thanks. weight 7 gram composition: 91.5% nickel, 7.5% copper and 1.0% tin