Just came across this on Coinflation: http://news.coinupdate.com/reintroduced-bill-seeks-steel-cents-nickels-dimes-and-quarters-4674/ ...but the fine print taketh away, most likely: That looks like three strikes to me: 1) Nearly any coin-acceptance mechanism would require multiple changes to adjust to new weights, new electromagnetic signatures, and, oh, yeah, the fact that all those simple magnetic traps would need to go. 2) Making slugs out of steel has to be easier than making slugs that will pass a current coin-acceptance mechanism. If the acceptors are supposed to distinguish real coins from a steel slug of the right thickness, diameter, and weight, I'm guessing that they'll need something a lot more sophisticated than the current mechanisms. 3) Oh, yeah, and if they need to accept both old and new coins, that makes point (1) above even more challenging. So now I'm trying to figure out what this guy's angle is for introducing a bill that's apparently designed to be dead-on-arrival. But I guess that would be verging into politics, and it's not that interesting anyhow...
I agree; so many things would have to change that it just isn't worth it! Vending machines, coin counters, toll stations etc. Its sorta related to why we don't switch to the metric system, it would cost to much money (because you would have to change all the rulers and speed limit signs etc!)!!!
Never happen! Every manufacturer of coin-op machines, every manufacturer of slot machines, every casino, every Indian tribe that runs casinos and every labor union involved with manufacturing coin-op machines will fight against it........ergo.......elect new politicians. Chris
Hmm. I was ready to mock the assumption that coins would demand a significant amount of steel, but: If I look at the 2014 Mint production figures, and make some fairly generous assumptions about the weight of steel coins, I get a figure around 50,000 tons of steel to make that year's worth of coins. (8 billion cents at 3g each, 1.2B nickels @ 5g, 2.3B dimes @ 2.5g, 1.6B quarters @ 6g) Looks like US steel production in 2014 was about 97 million tons. Another 50K tons would only amount to .05% -- but that's still a pretty big "drop", even in so huge a "bucket". I'm sure most any steel plant would be happy to be able to sell an additional 50K tons.
Vending machines are not the primitive bubble gum machines of old. They have computers, sensors and sophisticated electronics. They have internet access and take credit cards. They take bills and have counterfeit detection. I do not think there would be much problem. The mint loses money on cents and nickels now. Prices constantly creep up for commodities. What the mint loses is a pittance compared to the mind boggling spending of this admin, but eventually, they have to address the issue
Oh poor poor mint. First off they shouldnt be 'making' anything off of coining OUR money. Secondly if it only costs a small percentage over to make a cent, how much does it cost to make a quarter that doesnt use 25 times the materials of a cent? Or how about a dime that uses the least amount of raw materials of all the coins? What about half dollars that have 4 times the raw materials of a cent, but 50 times its purchasing power? I dont think you need to worry about the hooplah of it costing us money to make coins. They are still depositing 'seignorage' back into the coffers, so money is still being made from this process. I just have a problem with the accountability of exactly how much 'profit' is being made off of our coins. And no I am not talking about whats penned down in the yearly reports, I want to know the true excess that is available, because I have a feeling that some of that money goes to 'black projects' due to its ambiguity and how easily the real number can be hidden. Same with dollar bills. I guarantee you we wouldnt be printing $1 bills if it cost us money. So that leads me to believe that the cost associated with making a dollar is some percentage of the face value. So even if it cost $.99 to make every dollar, nothing changes on the larger denominations except the numbers and the face, the process is the same. So how much money is instantly conjured into thin air by this process? Where is all the purchasing power of this phenomenon going.
Is it just the skeptic in me that my first thought was how much steel industry does Rep. Steve Stivers of Ohio have in his district...
Ok so this is what I know... All the US money (coins & paper) that are made cost more then its face value anyway because the producers of money is not owned by the government it is owned by rockafellor and they give the money to the government BUT with interest hence why america stays in debt so a new material in coins will just put more money in there pockets. 2nd I have been in the coin-op business for a few years know and I know first had it would mess everything up and cost us a tun of money for new parts (coin mechanism) to accept new coins. Are new coin mecs use inferred to scan coins and can cost up to $20 EACH (that's cheap bulk manufacturing price) most arcade games can have 2-6 coin mecs. So to just throw all those out for new coins is ridiculous so I don't think this will get passed would cost more money to change everything to accept the new coins.
What an idiot. Never gonna happen. Most of the cost of the cent and nickel is not in material. Zinc is less than $1 a pound. Not sure how many cents that is, but it's a lot. If these morons were serious they'd drop the cent and the $1 bill. Then we'd have to use the 100 zillion dollar coins that are already in storage.
