Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Tom B, post: 894710, member: 11854&quot;]No.&nbsp; 19Lyds was correct in the overall idea, but I think the production figures might have been incorrect.&nbsp; The bottom line is that the US Mint made money for the US government last year, but the amount of money it could have made if it had not minted nickels would have been far more.&nbsp; The US Mint is <i>not </i> a private corporation or publicly traded stock, but rather funnels its profits into the US budget, which means that minting those 86,640,000 nickels at nine cents each cost the US budget almost $3.5 million in losses.&nbsp; This is the difference between the production cost at nice cents each and face value purchase power at five cents each for those 86.64 million nickels.&nbsp; It really doesn&#039;t matter that the US Mint made money on the production of quarters or other issues since the loss on the production of nickels took away $3.5 million of the profits generated by other coinage.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Additionally, since the US Mint has a monopoly on the production of legal tender coinage and currency within the US, there is no need to have a loss leader such as seen in the more open market and to which you refer in your post.&nbsp; <i>Every denomination </i> should be able to make money for the US government so that the profits can help reduce the national debt.&nbsp; Of course, a $3.5 million loss is trivial compared to our national debt.&nbsp; However, it is a loss that did not have to occur and is a loss that either raised the tax burden of current tax payers or raised the tax burden of future tax payers.[/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