Poll: Should the United States government eliminate the penny?

Well said! :thumb:

However, I might add that an Unc 1964 dime has the silver content today of $1.28...giving today's dime the purchasing power of about 3/4 of a 1964 cent. Perhaps we should dump the dime, while we're at it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Question...has anyone tried tipping their bartender with coins, lately? Try it and see what kind of "look" you get.

 

But, if it costs more to produce the coin than it's worth...isn't that a problem? The value of the cent has dropped so much due to inflation it's not even worth the metal in the coin (let alone the cost of production). They government is literally throwing money away (tax generated money) by producing the cent.

Then again, I don't have to worry about sales tax.

 

No! us Lincoln lover would die!

 

But your property tax you do.

 

Yeah...and so does my state income tax.

I just happen to live in one of a couple states that don't have sales tax. But, we make up for it in either property or state income tax.

 

You know what they stay there is only 2 thing you can not get away from Death & Tax'

 

Yes, eliminate it. It is probably worthless to everyone except coin collectors.

 

I don't see it as a problem because the mint more than makes up for it everywhere else (except the nickel ).

Seniorage from each quarter = 20.8 cents; each dollar coin = 94.8 cents.

ONE roll of 'mint wrapped' presidential dollars, now selling to collectors for just $35.95: Mint's profit = $23.81!

 

I used to live west of Portland and down near Rogue River some time back when the town of Wimer was still on the map.

 

keep and produce the cent for collectors. even the nickel. and you may discontinue them.

 

I find it hard to believe I'm the only one here who gets cents in change on a daily basis. Therefore, how is a cent worthless? I usually wrap about $10 a month in cents and take to the bank. I guess my rounding up wouldn't change that, huh?
Guy~ (cent profiteer)

 

So what you are saying is the stock holders in a company would be alright with taking less profit by continuing to make something for a loss, something that doesn't have to be made. If we make 7 billion cents a year for a loss of 1/2 cent each that would be an overall loss of 35 million dollars( where I come from that is a lot of money). Additionally 1 billion nickels at a loss of 1 cent each is an additional 10 million dollars. In the overall scheme of things may be small potatoes, but no different than skipping starbucks once a week.

 

unintended consequence

The cent probably should be eliminated. The unintended consequence would be that all item's costs will be rounded up to .05 or .10 depending (ie .22 to .25 or .27 to .30), no doubt.

 

If you plan it as a practice, then you must subsidize it by some other means. I can't speak about the cent, but the nickel is costing over 5¢ to make and I have heard a solution to the problem that's quite interesting to coin collectors. You don't need any change in legislation or coinage bill to make it happen either.

You start coining the clad half dime. Half the size of a dime, the treasury secretary can authorize the coin himself as the denomination is currently on the books and the design has not changed in over 25 years. Where I originally heard this is when the state of Virginia hi-jacked the reverse of the Nickel a few years ago. They soon figured out that legislation authorizing any new issue would override the current law rendering it a moot point.

 

Sorry for chiming in one these 2 posts so late but...

I do. It looks like this: ¢

and I can do it over and over again:

¢ ¢ ¢


and...

maybe they're doing that and nobody knows yet....shhhhhh!!!!!

 

WOW...that pizzed me off enough to look it up!

Thanks! ...¢¢¢¢¢☺

I change my vote...now that I know how to make the ¢ symbol, we might as well keep it for a while.

 

I would imagine that all items would be rounded for cash purchases...but as we are become more debit card based...I would think those purchases could still be made to the nearest cent.

 

Another thing that's come to mind re:the cent being "too costly" to make: With the new cent reverses, (not just one commemorative but FOUR), certainly the government decision makers knew that a huge portion of these would be saved as collectables by not just dedicated coin collectors, but widespread saving by the general public . So, if the government should be/is so concerned with the cost of manufacturing, why even make a coin that will be withheld from circulation to such a degree? I'm glad they made the new cents, but it makes absolutely no sense from a business standpoint as some of you are saying the mint should be looking at it.