Relief of the current Jefferson Nickel

I think the engraver would have included the stand on there coin. If made in the last century. The engraver is working on a medium that is 12" in diameter. It would not be very hard for them to make.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Actually, from the original photos, I see no difference in the reverses...1942-2006...look the same to me, plus are the same basic rendering. The obverse reliefs are indeed different, but they're also different designs...kind of like comparing apples and oranges. Understand there are certain relief differences...and indeed across all coins, not just the nickel...but again with the same reverse designs in these photos...appears no difference. Besides, what DOESN'T change from year(s) to year(s) of products, process and materials...?

 

IMHO the NEW nickels S U C K!

 

Bah!!!That ain't no nickel!

 

They aren't that bad!

 

so much detail on this coin!

 

Yes, I agree. It's VERY beautiful, isn't it? Especially when light shines through the center glass inset. And precisely because it's so detailed and beautiful, I was wondering whether it was created with the aid of a computer, based on a photograph, instead of an original artwork - simply because I was puzzled as to why the original designer would think to include that signage stand, which detracts from the beauty of the interior architecture. That's why I thought it might have been created from a photo. It was just a guess. I was not referring to whether an engraver could do this but some thought I was.

 

So you need to do an edit and include the 2 cent, 3 cent, and 20 cent pieces.

Except without the coins everything would be rounded and you would still pay with exact change. You just wouldn't need to use any 1 or five cent pieces. Everything would end in 0.

 

And the problem with that is, most businesses will round it in their favor, not the customers. I don't want to be paying A penny more than I need to just because someone doesn't want to mess with small change.

 

Those weren't withdrawn because they were "low denomination" as the wikipedia article is about. 1 cent would have to be withdrawn before the 2 cent would be considered. Anyway, I got way off topic.

 

Can't be done unless the businesses also insist that no one can buy more than one item at a time (Have 25 items, have to ring it up as 25 separate transactions! Would you go back to that store a second time?)

They would also have to eschew the use of cash registers because they would show one price while the cashier would be asking a higher price. (Same question, would you go back to such a store a second time?)

Electronic cash registers already have the rounding software built into them, it just has to be activated, and then the price you see is the price you pay. Rounding applied to the final total after taxes are applied. It will never be more than 2 cents off the exact price and half the time it will be rounded up, half the time rounded down so in the long run it come out even.

 

But the U.S. Mint, if they are truly committed to "making a profit" will continue to strike enhanced uncirculated and proof cents and nickels for collectors while discontinuing the business strikes for circulation. Canada missed the boat by not continuing to produce the cent for collectors only. But then again, IMHO the Canadian cent did not have the history or numbers produced that the Lincoln cent has.

 

The idea I always float is that the mint should go back to making pennies from bronze (as they'll be sold at a premium to face value anyway) and sell them in bags and rolls to collectors like they do currently with the half and dollar.

Considering Canada's love of churning out collectors' coins, I was really surprised they didn't do this. They already do it with their half.