I know this is post mint damage but is this really what they've been making our money out of since 1982? If so no wonder why all the manufacturing companies are making crappy products and sending them over here they see how our money falls apart after a few years and they copy us by making products with pressed metals inside & outside a thin layer of melted metals & calls it quality. You'll know what I'm talking about in these pictures
They have been making Copper Plated Zinc planchets since 1982. The majority of them, that amount is in the billions have survived. And they probably will for decades to come. It's just a very small amount that unfortunately become damaged due to some kind of environmental exposure such as a harsh chemical or long time exposure to the elements. In time they all are not going to look like your coin. So no need to worry
Keep in mind that the coin needs to hold the approximate value as its face value. The mint did significant study on proposed material/manufacturing solutions to produce the best option. Even pure copper cents have their limits.
Good question - here is what I found: https://www.usacoinbook.com/coin-melt-values/ I recall I read an article explaining why the mint had to move to the zinc core cent. Production (materials and labor) exceeded face value. Looking at copper cents, materials alone exceed face value. By the looks of it, cents and nickels have material value about face value. Higher denominations are a better value material costs alone. Production costs are probably higher given lower mintage numbers compared to cents and nickels.
I'm not sure if any country pays much attention of coins having a material value anywhere close to the denomination value. One of my fantasies is owning a silver center cent that the US considered when having material value close to denomination value was a "thing". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_center_cent
