2010: The End of the Cent?
malanu...@aol.com
I was talking with Daniel Carr (the creator of U.S. $1 and $2 coin
prototypes) about my coin and currency issues, and here's what he had
to say:
He feels that there is a 50/50 chance that there will be NO one cent
coins issued after 2009, as there has been no disussion for what to do
with the cent, in terms of design, for 2010 and beyond.
(Fred, what do you think about this prediction?)
He also thinks that a $2 coin is more likely than a redesigned $2
bill, but not by much.
He also said that, even with that positive wording on the
Congressional testimony I showed him, he thinks that the odds of the
U.S. issuing any denomination higher than $100 is less than a 50/50/
chence.
And finally, he said:
Elimination of $1 and $2 bills and replacement by coins (for general
use) may happen when and if
the government-owned US Treasury (US Mint) and the corporate-owned
Federal Reserve become
one and the same. Either the Federal Reserve must take over the US
Mint, or the US Government
must take back money issuing authority from the Federal Reserve. I
hope it will be the latter.
I don't think much of anything will happen until that issue is
resolved.
Fred,
What do you think of these statements? Are they anything related to
the "secret plan"?
Dan thinks I should concintrate on getting all paper money below $10
elminated, and replaced by coins, but I may end up trying to get a
sketch of a redesigned $2 bill to send to the Treasury, BEP, and Coin
World. Even though Fred thinks I'd be viewed as a nutcase for
submitting an idea. Nevermind the countless ammount of people sending
in their dollar coin suggestions before the Sac GD was made.
"Roßert G. Schaffrath"
>
> He feels that there is a 50/50 chance that there will be NO one cent
> coins issued after 2009, as there has been no disussion for what to do
> with the cent, in terms of design, for 2010 and beyond.
Probably because Congress has had other things on its mind. Look how
long it took to get over the Senate hold and pass the Territorial
Quarters program. It was so late that two of the designs, Puerto Rico
and American Samoa, are still not finalized.
I have no doubt that the Illinois delegation will come up with something
in the New Year. After all, the Virginia delegation made sure the
Nickel came back with Monticello on the reverse.
>
> He also thinks that a $2 coin is more likely than a redesigned $2
> bill, but not by much.
That probably makes sense. I do like the paper but having just come
back from one of my annual trip to Toronto, I have to admit those $1 and
$2 coins last a long time. I still receive 1986 dated Loonies and 1996
dated Twonies (first years of issue) in change. How many $1 dollar
bills from the 1980's do you still find in circulation?
Still as you pointed out, until the Federal Reserve Bank and U.S. Mint
are merged or the Fed is willing to give up the $1 and $2 monetary
instruments, it will be the same old story.
Michael G. Koerner
> malanu...@aol.com wrote:
> >
>> He feels that there is a 50/50 chance that there will be NO one cent
>> coins issued after 2009, as there has been no disussion for what to do
>> with the cent, in terms of design, for 2010 and beyond.
>
> Probably because Congress has had other things on its mind. Look how
> long it took to get over the Senate hold and pass the Territorial
> Quarters program. It was so late that two of the designs, Puerto Rico
> and American Samoa, are still not finalized.
I hope that PR uses that design with the Fort's parapet - that one is SWEET!
> I have no doubt that the Illinois delegation will come up with something
> in the New Year. After all, the Virginia delegation made sure the
> Nickel came back with Monticello on the reverse.
>
>>
>> He also thinks that a $2 coin is more likely than a redesigned $2
>> bill, but not by much.
I also agree that a $2 coin would work well in the USA and would not mind
seeing a $5 coin, too. Like in the rest of the World, make the coins, drop
the banknotes and all will be well.
> That probably makes sense. I do like the paper but having just come
> back from one of my annual trip to Toronto, I have to admit those $1 and
> $2 coins last a long time. I still receive 1986 dated Loonies and 1996
> dated Twonies (first years of issue) in change. How many $1 dollar
> bills from the 1980's do you still find in circulation?
1986? What part of Canada did you visit? hehehehehehehe
(Loonies were turned loose upon the World in 1987)
> Still as you pointed out, until the Federal Reserve Bank and U.S. Mint
> are merged or the Fed is willing to give up the $1 and $2 monetary
> instruments, it will be the same old story.
Or at least get some unnamed Congresscritters from an unnamed northeastern
state out of the way!
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Paul Ciszek
In article <9bd23810-95c0-42c4...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
<malanu...@aol.com> wrote:
>Hey,
>
>I was talking with Daniel Carr (the creator of U.S. $1 and $2 coin
>prototypes) about my coin and currency issues, and here's what he had
Is there a picture of the $2 coin prototype online anywhere?
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
Phil DeMayo
> In article <9bd23810-95c0-42c4-b991-9cbd62a1b...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> �<malanutt4l...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Hey,
>
> >I was talking with Daniel Carr (the creator of U.S. $1 and $2 coin
> >prototypes) �about my coin and currency issues, and here's what he had
>
> Is there a picture of the $2 coin prototype online anywhere?
He did a bi-metallic version of his astronaut dollar as a $2
prototype.
http://www.dc-coin.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=1
Let the whole page load....the last three are the $2 prototype.
Paul Ciszek
In article <6aydnRO64vlLK6fU...@ntd.net>,
Michael G. Koerner <mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>
>I also agree that a $2 coin would work well in the USA and would not mind
>seeing a $5 coin, too. Like in the rest of the World, make the coins, drop
>the banknotes and all will be well.
Has anyone ever tried to determine, either mathematically or in practice,
the optimum distribution of denominations? The denominations currently
in common use in the US are:
$0.01, $0.05, $0.10, $0.25, $1, $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100
I am deliberately leaving out the $0.50 and $2.00 because sales clerks
give you funny looks when you try to spend them, and no one seems to
be inconvenienced by their absence.
No one seems to mind a ratio of 5 between the dollar bill/coin and the
five-spot, or between the penny and the nickel, nor a ratio of 4
between the quarter and the dollar. Even the $10 gets less use than
the $20, and $50's are pretty rare, thanks to ATMs. Do we really need
coins or bills that are merely twice or 2.5 times the value of another
coin or bill? It seems to me that a more efficient system of
denominations would go:
$0.05, $0.25, $1, $5, $20, $100, $500
(I predict that inflation will make the penny absurd and the $500 bill
necessary.)
Fewer denominations means that each will get full use, yet you never
have to receive more than four of any denomination in change.
Bruce Remick
"Paul Ciszek" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:gheikm$pt4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>
> In article <6aydnRO64vlLK6fU...@ntd.net>,
> Michael G. Koerner <mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>>
>>I also agree that a $2 coin would work well in the USA and would not mind
>>seeing a $5 coin, too. Like in the rest of the World, make the coins,
>>drop
>>the banknotes and all will be well.
>
> Has anyone ever tried to determine, either mathematically or in practice,
> the optimum distribution of denominations? The denominations currently
> in common use in the US are:
>
> $0.01, $0.05, $0.10, $0.25, $1, $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100
>
> I am deliberately leaving out the $0.50 and $2.00 because sales clerks
> give you funny looks when you try to spend them, and no one seems to
> be inconvenienced by their absence.
Some here go out of their way to obtain and spend them, just to see the
reaction by the young or recent immigrant clerks.
>
> No one seems to mind a ratio of 5 between the dollar bill/coin and the
> five-spot, or between the penny and the nickel, nor a ratio of 4
> between the quarter and the dollar. Even the $10 gets less use than
> the $20, and $50's are pretty rare, thanks to ATMs. Do we really need
> coins or bills that are merely twice or 2.5 times the value of another
> coin or bill? It seems to me that a more efficient system of
> denominations would go:
>
> $0.05, $0.25, $1, $5, $20, $100, $500
I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios". When paying cash they
simply spend what they happen to have handy. When paying for a big ticket
item, they usually avoid cash altogether.
>
> (I predict that inflation will make the penny absurd and the $500 bill
> necessary.)
Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card, personal
check, PayPal, etc.? If you were a merchant, would you like to wipe out
your change drawer by accepting a $500 bill for a $278 purchase, considering
that most nowadays don't keep bills larger than a $10 in the till?
>
> Fewer denominations means that each will get full use, yet you never
> have to receive more than four of any denomination in change.
I never get more than four coin denominations in change now. Penny, nickel,
dime, and quarter. You'd need a massive list of signatures to ever convince
Congress that the population believes your concept is more efficient and
what we have now should be changed.
Arizona Coin Collector
<malanu...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9bd23810-95c0-42c4...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> Hey,
>
> He feels that there is a 50/50 chance that there will be NO one cent
> coins issued after 2009, as there has been no disussion for what to do
> with the cent, in terms of design, for 2010 and beyond.
>
Hello
The penny will be around after 2009. See links and
remarks below from the U.S. Mint and "PRESIDENTIAL
$1 COIN ACT OF 2005" / Public Law 109-145.
-----------------------------------------------
FROM:
http://www.usmint.gov/mint_programs/lincolnRedesign/
--- snip ---
At the conclusion of the 2009 Lincoln Bicentennial
One-Cent Program, the 2010 (and beyond) one-cent
coin will feature a reverse design that will be
emblematic of President Lincoln's preservation of
the United States of America as a single and
united country.
--- snip ---
FROM:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ145.109
The design on the reverse of the 1-cent coins issued after December
31, 2009, shall bear an image emblematic of President Lincoln's
preservation of the United States of America as a single and united
country.
Approved December 22, 2005.
Slime Lowlife
> Hey,
>
> I was talking with Daniel Carr (the creator of U.S. $1 and $2 coin
> prototypes) about my coin and currency issues, and here's what he had
> to say:
>
> He feels that there is a 50/50 chance that there will be NO one cent
> coins issued after 2009, as there has been no disussion for what to do
> with the cent, in terms of design, for 2010 and beyond.
>
> (Fred, what do you think about this prediction?)
>
For whatever it's worth, my opinion is that they may still coin cents
after 2009, but include them only in mint sets and maybe sold in bags &
rolls off the Web site. Just like halves, really. They stay an
"official" part of the monetary system, but aren't encountered in
real-life commerce, & their online selling premiums makes the negative
seignorage a nonissue.
> He also thinks that a $2 coin is more likely than a redesigned $2
> bill, but not by much.
>
> He also said that, even with that positive wording on the
> Congressional testimony I showed him, he thinks that the odds of the
> U.S. issuing any denomination higher than $100 is less than a 50/50/
> chance.
>
I agree that it's not particularly likely. While our inflation rate
has been enough, over the past 7 decades, to makes all our coinage
nearly trivial in value, it's been gradual enough that people don't
readily notice. If we were in a situation where prices doubled every
year for a few decades, then we would've been seeing
higher-denomination coins & notes come about over time. As it is,
we're only just now deciding to let go of the cent, & things like
credit cards are filling in for anything bigger than the $100.
> And finally, he said:
>
> Elimination of $1 and $2 bills and replacement by coins (for general
> use) may happen when and if the government-owned US Treasury (US Mint) and the corporate-owned
> Federal Reserve become one and the same. Either the Federal Reserve must take over the US
> Mint, or the US Government must take back money issuing authority from the Federal Reserve. I
> hope it will be the latter. I don't think much of anything will happen until that issue is
> resolved.
>
What is his reasoning for this? Most of the "money" the Federal
Reserve works with is simply so many computer entries in databases &
never even gets put on paper. I also tend to doubt that the total
volume of $1s & $2s outstanding forms even 10% of the total "money" the
Fed works with; I don't think they'll lose sleep if it's decided to
turn everything below a $10 into coinage.
> Fred,
>
> What do you think of these statements? Are they anything related to
> the "secret plan"?
>
I'm curious about this plan...
malanu...@aol.com
Those aren't Dan's only prototypes of $2 coins. I've seen that he also
made them as a silver ring around a gold center, just like the
Canadian $2 coin. Its still the same astronaut design, though. The
only difference is, the colors of the metals are reversed. I think the
gold ring around the silver prototype would be best for a $5 coin, and
I believe that that is exactly how Canada will do their $5 coin
(golden ring around a silver center, reverse of the $2 coin) if they
issue a coin to replace their $5 bill, as they talk about, from time
to time.
Ahh..Here they are:
http://www.designscomputed.com/coins/astro.html
The one on the left is perfect for a U.S. $5 coin prototype, and the
one on the right is perfect for a U.S. $2 coin prototype.
malanu...@aol.com
>
> > $0.05, $0.25, $1, $5, $20, $100, $500
>
> I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios". When paying cash they
> simply spend what they happen to have handy. When paying for a big ticket
> item, they usually avoid cash altogether.
>
>
>
> > (I predict that inflation will make the penny absurd and the $500 bill
> > necessary.)
>
> Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
> pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card, personal
> check, PayPal, etc.? If you were a merchant, would you like to wipe out
> your change drawer by accepting a $500 bill for a $278 purchase, considering
> that most nowadays don't keep bills larger than a $10 in the till?
>
>
>
> > Fewer denominations means that each will get full use, yet you never
> > have to receive more than four of any denomination in change.
>
> I never get more than four coin denominations in change now. Penny, nickel,
> dime, and quarter. You'd need a massive list of signatures to ever convince
> Congress that the population believes your concept is more efficient and
> what we have now should be changed.- Hide quoted text -
>
Ah ha! Bruce, I may have got you here.
I don't know much about credit and/or debit cards, but, my brother has
just recently made me aware that, stores are charged a fee for
consumers using these cards. He also said he believes, eventually, the
stores will likely pass that fee on to the consumers, and that its
only a matter of time. He said he is suprised it hasn't happened, so
far, even.
So, I can argue to a lot of people to get on the $200, $500, and
$1,000 bill band wagon, if this fee ever is charged to the consumers.
In fact, most people are so greedy, that, there would probably be more
people besides me, pushing the "Bring back the $500, and $1,000 bill"
campaign, if the stores start charging consumers fees for using those
annoying cards.
Joshua McGee
> just recently made me aware that, stores are charged a fee for
> consumers using these cards. He also said he believes, eventually, the
> stores will likely pass that fee on to the consumers, and that its
> only a matter of time. He said he is suprised it hasn't happened, so
> far, even.
That's because, last time I researched it, the cc companies forbade
contracting merchants in the US from adding a cc surcharge. Some
stores to get around it with a "cash discount", but that is forbidden,
too. Many stores have "credit card minimum purchases" (frequently
$10), and those seem to be OK.
- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org
Jon Jon
I hope the penny ends, since I have pretty much a whole 5 X 10 storage
shed of them, most from the 50's,60's and 70's .. progressively the same
from the 80's,90's, and 00's.
A few from the 30's and 40's.
Doubt I'll ever see any intrinsic value from them, but hopefully the
Granddaughter does :-)
"Roßert G. Schaffrath"
> That's because, last time I researched it, the cc companies forbade
> contracting merchants in the US from adding a cc surcharge. Some
> stores to get around it with a "cash discount", but that is forbidden,
> too. Many stores have "credit card minimum purchases" (frequently
> $10), and those seem to be OK.
Actually the "Cash Discount" seems to be passing muster (it is the CC
surcharge that is forbidden). The "Cash Discount" is what most gas
stations started doing this summer and they are able to get away with
it. Where they have been running afoul of the law is posting the cash
price alone or not making it clear that it is the cash price resulting
in sticker shock when you pull up to the pump.
I switched to cash this summer when the different hit about $.10/gallon
between cash and credit.
Bruce Remick
<malanu...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7bec8e44-1bcc-4ff0...@g38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > $0.05, $0.25, $1, $5, $20, $100, $500
>
> I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios". When paying cash they
> simply spend what they happen to have handy. When paying for a big ticket
> item, they usually avoid cash altogether.
>
>
>
> > (I predict that inflation will make the penny absurd and the $500 bill
> > necessary.)
>
> Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
> pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card,
> personal
> check, PayPal, etc.? If you were a merchant, would you like to wipe out
> your change drawer by accepting a $500 bill for a $278 purchase,
> considering
> that most nowadays don't keep bills larger than a $10 in the till?
>
>
>
> > Fewer denominations means that each will get full use, yet you never
> > have to receive more than four of any denomination in change.
>
> I never get more than four coin denominations in change now. Penny,
> nickel,
> dime, and quarter. You'd need a massive list of signatures to ever
> convince
> Congress that the population believes your concept is more efficient and
> what we have now should be changed.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Ah ha! Bruce, I may have got you here.
If in your mind you do, then you did.
> I don't know much about credit and/or debit cards, but, my brother has
> just recently made me aware that, stores are charged a fee for
> consumers using these cards. He also said he believes, eventually, the
> stores will likely pass that fee on to the consumers, and that its
> only a matter of time. He said he is suprised it hasn't happened, so
> far, even.
I believe that most stores already incorporate any credit card fees into
their prices. So whether you use a $500 bill or a credit card, you'll pay
the same price. Just like at the majority of gas stations that don't
advertise a lower "cash" price. So there's really no advantage to using
cash, unless you can dicker on the price that way.
> So, I can argue to a lot of people to get on the $200, $500, and
> $1,000 bill band wagon, if this fee ever is charged to the consumers.
> In fact, most people are so greedy, that, there would probably be more
> people besides me, pushing the "Bring back the $500, and $1,000 bill"
> campaign, if the stores start charging consumers fees for using those
> annoying cards.
I did most of my Christmas shopping on the internet using one of those
"annoying cards". Pretty convenient and I doubt they would have given me
change for a $500 bill in the mail, were I stupid enough to send one. As I
said before, checkout clerks don't react when you present a credit card by
saying "Oh, that will be 5% more." The sticker price already has potential
credit card fees factored in. So why not use one rather than carry large
amounts of cash? And if those large denomination bills ever did become
common, I'd bet that muggers and robbers would have a merry Christmas at the
expense of well-heeled shoppers
I can understand the feelings of people who don't care for credit cards. I
preferred cash myself during most of my life. But with the advent of online
shopping and the recent 5% discount gasoline offers, I have become
comfortable with the card. But I never charge anything that I don't have
the money available to pay for and always zero-out my balance with each
statement. Never any interest charges.
rjn
> I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios".
> When paying cash they simply spend what they
> happen to have handy.
Which is the cash they got, usually from an ATM or
in change from a cash register. What denominations
are available is limited by the ATM bill feeders and
the tray count in the cash drawers.
The general rule seems to be that to add a denom,
you need to eliminate a denom, or it won't circulate.
This is a problem for the $2 certificate, for example.
Eliminating the penny would make room for a new token.
If a future Admin revisits runaway inflation,
perhaps a $10 token might be in order.
--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:na...@ispname.tld
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.
PC
"rjn" <emai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67342dc0-1d98-4f73...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
> I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios".
> When paying cash they simply spend what they
> happen to have handy.
Which is the cash they got, usually from an ATM or
in change from a cash register. What denominations
are available is limited by the ATM bill feeders and
the tray count in the cash drawers.
The general rule seems to be that to add a denom,
you need to eliminate a denom, or it won't circulate.
This is a problem for the $2 certificate, for example.
Eliminating the penny would make room for a new token.
If a future Admin revisits runaway inflation,
perhaps a $10 token might be in order.
>>>
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would fight to keep the cent
around unless they have interests in zinc or something.
Just let it go. It is worthless and the nickel is pretty much there too.
Paul Ciszek
In article <WwA_k.9255$yB4....@newsfe07.iad>,
Bruce Remick <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>"Paul Ciszek" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:gheikm$pt4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>>
>> necessary.)
>
>Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
>pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card, personal
>check, PayPal, etc.?
Oh, maybe if the federal government were to suddenly create 4 trillion
dollars out of thin air, starting an inflationary spiral and general
mistrust in the dollar, to the point where the price of a big mac soars
to over $10 and keeps climbing.
Meanwhile, you have a bunch of foreclosed and/or personally bankrupt
citizens who have no credit cards, plus a lot of others, either non-
citizens or citizens who just prefer to evade taxes, working under the
table for cash.
> If you were a merchant, would you like to wipe out
>your change drawer by accepting a $500 bill for a $278 purchase, considering
>that most nowadays don't keep bills larger than a $10 in the till?
If I were a merchant in that scenario, I would wish I could do business
in some other, more dependable currency. Hell, I would be trying to save
up enough to evacuate myself and my family to a less stupidly run country,
but that's another issue. Meanwhile, though, if I were selling things
to people who don't have credit, my cash register would contain $100's
and $20's, and giving change in coins worth less than a dollar would be
a sick joke.
Paul Ciszek
In article <7bec8e44-1bcc-4ff0...@g38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
<malanu...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Ah ha! Bruce, I may have got you here.
>
>I don't know much about credit and/or debit cards, but, my brother has
>just recently made me aware that, stores are charged a fee for
>consumers using these cards. He also said he believes, eventually, the
>stores will likely pass that fee on to the consumers, and that its
>only a matter of time. He said he is suprised it hasn't happened, so
>far, even.
Taking credit cards involves a fee; taking cash involves the possibility
that someone could rob the store at gunpoint. Some stores consider it
a wash, while others actually hate cash. And a lot of them don't take
checks anymore.
Paul Ciszek
In article <ghguis$sm7$1...@news.motzarella.org>, PC <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote:
>
>I have a hard time understanding why anyone would fight to keep the cent
>around unless they have interests in zinc or something.
People who can't be bothered to redeem a can or bottle worth 10 cents
can still go ballistic if they get $1.35 in change instead of the $1.36
they are entitled to. People are strange that way.
Bruce Remick
"rjn" <emai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67342dc0-1d98-4f73...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
> I doubt most consumers think in term of "ratios".
> When paying cash they simply spend what they
> happen to have handy.
Which is the cash they got, usually from an ATM or
in change from a cash register. What denominations
are available is limited by the ATM bill feeders and
the tray count in the cash drawers.
___________
That's it in a nutshell. Hard to get anything larger than a twenty anywhere
unless you ask specifically for it.
Bruce Remick
>
> In article <ghguis$sm7$1...@news.motzarella.org>, PC <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us>
> wrote:
>>
>>I have a hard time understanding why anyone would fight to keep the cent
>>around unless they have interests in zinc or something.
>
> People who can't be bothered to redeem a can or bottle worth 10 cents
> can still go ballistic if they get $1.35 in change instead of the $1.36
> they are entitled to. People are strange that way.
You're quite observant of human nature. And I doubt we humans will ever
change.
PC
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4cV_k.16463$M33....@newsfe03.iad...
These must be the same people who win your eBay auctions, wait 10 days to
pay, and on the 12th day ask why the package has not arrived ;-)
Bruce Remick
>
> In article <WwA_k.9255$yB4....@newsfe07.iad>,
> Bruce Remick <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>"Paul Ciszek" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>news:gheikm$pt4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>>>
>>> (I predict that inflation will make the penny absurd and the $500 bill
>>> necessary.)
>>
>>Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
>>pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card,
>>personal
>>check, PayPal, etc.?
>
> Oh, maybe if the federal government were to suddenly create 4 trillion
> dollars out of thin air, starting an inflationary spiral and general
> mistrust in the dollar, to the point where the price of a big mac soars
> to over $10 and keeps climbing.
> Meanwhile, you have a bunch of foreclosed and/or personally bankrupt
> citizens who have no credit cards, plus a lot of others, either non-
> citizens or citizens who just prefer to evade taxes, working under the
> table for cash.
If you're bankrupt with no credit cards, you probably won't be carrying $500
bills either.
How many people who hire illegals will be apt to hand them a $500 bill for
their work?
>
>> If you were a merchant, would you like to wipe out
>>your change drawer by accepting a $500 bill for a $278 purchase,
>>considering
>>that most nowadays don't keep bills larger than a $10 in the till?
>
> If I were a merchant in that scenario, I would wish I could do business
> in some other, more dependable currency. Hell, I would be trying to save
> up enough to evacuate myself and my family to a less stupidly run country,
> but that's another issue. Meanwhile, though, if I were selling things
> to people who don't have credit, my cash register would contain $100's
> and $20's, and giving change in coins worth less than a dollar would be
> a sick joke.
Check out your local 7-Eleven's cash drawer. Or the liquor store till in a
rough urban neighborhood. I doubt you'll see any twenties or hundreds in
the drawer. The argument here involves the potential future need for $500
bills or larger. I'm against it, and it appears you are, too.
Paul Ciszek
In article <YkV_k.16466$M33....@newsfe03.iad>,>news:ghh0lf$kgk$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>>
>>>Under what circumstances would you expect significant numbers of people to
>>>pay for purchases with a $500 bill instead of a credit/debit card,
>>>personal
>>>check, PayPal, etc.?
>>
>> Oh, maybe if the federal government were to suddenly create 4 trillion
>> dollars out of thin air, starting an inflationary spiral and general
>> mistrust in the dollar, to the point where the price of a big mac soars
>> to over $10 and keeps climbing.
>> Meanwhile, you have a bunch of foreclosed and/or personally bankrupt
>> citizens who have no credit cards, plus a lot of others, either non-
>> citizens or citizens who just prefer to evade taxes, working under the
>> table for cash.
>
>If you're bankrupt with no credit cards, you probably won't be carrying $500
>bills either.
>
>How many people who hire illegals will be apt to hand them a $500 bill for
>their work?
In this future distopia where a big mac costs $15, even illegals may be
paid in $100 bills at the end of the day; plumbers and electricians
working under the table might get paid in $500, as might people who
get paid at the end of the week.
And the next year when the big mac costs $50, you won't be able to avoid
the necessity of a $500 bill.
>Check out your local 7-Eleven's cash drawer. Or the liquor store till in a
>rough urban neighborhood. I doubt you'll see any twenties or hundreds in
>the drawer.
Of course not; the dollar hasn't collapsed quite yet.
> The argument here involves the potential future need for $500
>bills or larger. I'm against it, and it appears you are, too.
Only in the same sense I am "against" old age, pattern baldness, joint
pain, etc. But none of those things care whether you are against them
or not.
Bruce Remick
Today or tomorrow, homeowners who have a $500 plumbing job are unlikely to
keep a $500 bill handy to pay the tab-- above or under the table. It's just
not a safe or practical means of payment, especially if that under the table
plumber should later decide to claim you stiffed him out of $500 worth of
work. I suppose you could counter by claiming he was never there.
>
> And the next year when the big mac costs $50, you won't be able to avoid
> the necessity of a $500 bill.
One $50 bill should take care of things. Or two twenties and a ten. Or
more likely a credit card. We have those choices now. Of course if you
want to Super-size that Big Mac, you may need an extra twenty.
>
>>Check out your local 7-Eleven's cash drawer. Or the liquor store till in
>>a
>>rough urban neighborhood. I doubt you'll see any twenties or hundreds in
>>the drawer.
>
> Of course not; the dollar hasn't collapsed quite yet.
But neither has urban crime, which surely would prosper if crackheads expect
to find large bills sitting in the cash drawers at those convenience and
liquor stores.
>
>> The argument here involves the potential future need for $500
>>bills or larger. I'm against it, and it appears you are, too.
>
> Only in the same sense I am "against" old age, pattern baldness, joint
> pain, etc. But none of those things care whether you are against them
> or not.
Conceivably, one could *vote* against the return of a $500 or $1,000 bill.
As for age, baldness and pain......well.......
note.boy
"Joshua McGee" <joshu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6f0ed529-9a03-4e7e...@z27g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
It's a similar situation in the UK. Billy
note.boy
When paying for something you are not getting immediate possession of, e.g.
a holiday, it's prudent to always pay by credit card, if the tour operator,
or airline, goes bust the card company will give a full refund, pay by debit
card, cheque or cash and you will get zero back.
There are many in the UK that wish they had done so when an airline recently
went bust. Billy
shreadvector
> In article
> <9bd23810-95c0-42c4-b991-9cbd62a1b...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
>
Curious enough to use "Google"??
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.collecting.coins/search?group=rec.collecting.coins&q=secret+plan
Paul Ciszek
In article <akX_k.12537$yB5....@newsfe21.iad>,
Bruce Remick <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> And the next year when the big mac costs $50, you won't be able to avoid
>> the necessity of a $500 bill.
>
>One $50 bill should take care of things. Or two twenties and a ten. Or
>more likely a credit card. We have those choices now. Of course if you
>want to Super-size that Big Mac, you may need an extra twenty.
>
>>
>>>Check out your local 7-Eleven's cash drawer. Or the liquor store till in
>>>a
>>>rough urban neighborhood. I doubt you'll see any twenties or hundreds in
>>>the drawer.
>>
>> Of course not; the dollar hasn't collapsed quite yet.
>
>But neither has urban crime, which surely would prosper if crackheads expect
>to find large bills sitting in the cash drawers at those convenience and
>liquor stores.
You're not getting it. When the Big Mac Index hits $50, that $500 bill
is worth about $30 in today's money, and $100 will be a small bill indeed.
In Germany between the wars, were thieves driven wild by the prospect of
being able to steal million-mark bills? Or did they have as much contempt
for the mark as everyone else, and steal things of value instead?
>>> The argument here involves the potential future need for $500
>>>bills or larger. I'm against it, and it appears you are, too.
>>
>> Only in the same sense I am "against" old age, pattern baldness, joint
>> pain, etc. But none of those things care whether you are against them
>> or not.
>
>Conceivably, one could *vote* against the return of a $500 or $1,000 bill.
>As for age, baldness and pain......well.......
You mean we can just vote against inflation and it will go away?
Yeah, right.
--
Please reply to: | "One of the hardest parts of my job is to
pciszek at panix dot com | connect Iraq to the War on Terror."
Autoreply is disabled | -- G. W. Bush, 9/7/2006
Bruce Remick
>
> In article <akX_k.12537$yB5....@newsfe21.iad>,
> Bruce Remick <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> And the next year when the big mac costs $50, you won't be able to avoid
>>> the necessity of a $500 bill.
>>
>>One $50 bill should take care of things. Or two twenties and a ten. Or
>>more likely a credit card. We have those choices now. Of course if you
>>want to Super-size that Big Mac, you may need an extra twenty.
>>
>>>
>>>>Check out your local 7-Eleven's cash drawer. Or the liquor store till
>>>>in
>>>>a
>>>>rough urban neighborhood. I doubt you'll see any twenties or hundreds
>>>>in
>>>>the drawer.
>>>
>>> Of course not; the dollar hasn't collapsed quite yet.
>>
>>But neither has urban crime, which surely would prosper if crackheads
>>expect
>>to find large bills sitting in the cash drawers at those convenience and
>>liquor stores.
>
> You're not getting it. When the Big Mac Index hits $50, that $500 bill
> is worth about $30 in today's money, and $100 will be a small bill indeed.
> In Germany between the wars, were thieves driven wild by the prospect of
> being able to steal million-mark bills? Or did they have as much contempt
> for the mark as everyone else, and steal things of value instead?
I guess I'm not as pessimistic as you are. If or when a Big Mac ever sells
for $50, we will have long since abandoned the need for cash of all kinds.
And the the health police probably will have prohibited the sale of Big Macs
by then anyway. The fellow here proposing the return of the $500 bill is
talking about *now*, not a couple generations from now. We've made it
through the past two generations of inflation without a demand for higher
denomination bills, or coins for that matter. I've lived through that
time, but I wasn't around between the Wars so I don't know what the German
thieves were thinking or doing.
>
>>>> The argument here involves the potential future need for $500
>>>>bills or larger. I'm against it, and it appears you are, too.
>>>
>>> Only in the same sense I am "against" old age, pattern baldness, joint
>>> pain, etc. But none of those things care whether you are against them
>>> or not.
>>
>>Conceivably, one could *vote* against the return of a $500 or $1,000 bill.
>>As for age, baldness and pain......well.......
>
> You mean we can just vote against inflation and it will go away?
> Yeah, right.
We could vote against reintroducing $500 and $1,000 bills by voting for
officials who agree. Or not. Depending on how excited one is over the
issue. I suppose if you think about it, voters could probably delay
inflation by the way they voted. But then since wages typically keep pace
with inflation, what's the big deal.
Slime Lowlife
<a0789172-d64f-4325...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
shreadvector <fred.e....@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
OK, thanks.
Of course the second or third item appears to be a post about the
"secret plan" to put Masonic symbols on the New Hampshire State
Quarter, thus completing the conspiracy's conquest of the United
States, but I'm sure you didn't mean that this was the actual plan &
that all the bits about circulating dollar coins are a desperate
attempt to swamp the Google results so that the secret won't get out,
no sir-ee!
DON'T WORRY, I DIDN'T READ ANY OF IT AT ALL, LALALALALALALALALALALA!!!!
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!!! IN FACT, I'M TYPING WITH MY EYES
COLSED RIHGT NOW SO THAT I WONT' SEE ANYTHIGN ELSE INCRIMINATING.
What do you mean it's time for my meds again??