Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Michael K, post: 26610983, member: 78298&quot;]I keep hearing about how it costs more to make a coin than what it is worth, so there must be a loss. But it&#039;s really not so black and white. Besides the mint &quot;selling&quot; proof coins, commems, etc. and making a profit on all these things, the mint really doesn&#039;t have to be in the business of making a profit. The post office used to make a profit but IDT they do anymore, and most or all of the gov&#039;t agencies don&#039;t make a profit.</p><p>Also, when coins circulated more than they do now, each coin was used many thousands of times during their life in transactions, and still retained their initial value. So even though it cost more to make than their initial value, doesn&#039;t using this same coin thousands of times in transactions make up for that? If a nickel cost 4 cents to make or 8 cents to make are you really seeing a profit or a loss? Considering the national debt which is 38 trillion dollars, I don&#039;t think that difference really matters much. In order to understand how much 38 trillion is, one billion seconds takes almost 31 1/2 years, so 1 trillion seconds takes 31,500 years. Also, if you take the cost/value&nbsp; gain/loss of ALL the circulating coinage, the mint is still coming out ahead of the initial cost.</p><p>However, when you add in the operating costs of salaries, machines, raw materials, maintenance and whatever other costs they have, (rent? utilities? etc.) maybe they are never making a profit anyway. The larger problem was having a central bank make our money which we have to &quot;pay&quot; for or, pay interest on, when we just could have produced our own currency. We can never pay back 38 trillion dollars. It is a pyramid scheme that is destined to collapse.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in