Medals and Coins and Stamps, Oh My!

[mazorj]

 

In the grand scheme of things, production of medals is a minor Mint activity and is dictated by Congress.  But the Mint always seems to be overextended in its obligations and activities, so it makes no sense that they consume Mint resources issuing medals for the likes of former Secretaries of the Treasury and a PGA golfer.  (Those are current offerings, others of equally baffling logic can be found in past and future listings.)  A medal presumably requires almost as much design work and pre-production as a coin.  Then there is the actual coining (medaling?) and distribution.  Even with the enormous mark-up on materials for the $38 versions, most of these "ego candy" medals must be a net loss for the Mint.  After they sell them to friends, family, suck-ups, and however many compulsive collectors there are who have to have one of everything, who buys these things?  Who the hell would want them?

 

I have no problem with legitimate subjects such as most of the historical commemoratives and the occasional noteworthy individual.  I even have bought a few.  But recent cabinet officers and golfers?  We've rightly griped about the occasional doubtful coin issuance but the Goofy Medal program churns out these turkeys year in and year out.  IMO it's as silly and as wasteful as the Post Office stamps for the likes of Elvis and cartoon characters.

 

In a separate but related vein:  There almost certainly will be a Michael Jackson stamp.  Anyone want to wager on whether his surgically mutilated visage will grace a medal or coin?  My money says that a coin is (thankfully) DOA except for the inevitable stickered "Michael Jackson Holographic Quarter" from the TV hucksters.  OTOH with Congress still in session, I wouldn't bet the next mortgage payment against a mandate for a Mint-issue medal.   Purists may howl and everyone disgusted with his, um, "erratic" behavior might deem it a sacrilege; but there is a rational financial argument to be made.  If they were to promote them in markets where his Q rating is astronomical, the Mint could easily profit (for once) by selling a boatload of bronze, silver, and even gold medals.  I'm not advocating this - far from it - but the market certainly is ripe to separate distraught, overwrought MJ suck- oops - MJ fans from their money.

 

(10, 9, 8, 7, 6...)

 

[oly]

How can you be out in Washington D.C., be some form of lobbyist, and
not understand the mentality that places Cabinet officers and similar
such persons on medals??? Odd. Very very odd. Of course, it is a
minor form of immortality for people with substantial egos. The
medals undoubtedly cost more that they bring in in most instances, but
it is the Republic's traditional way of saying thanks to certain
individuals for a job well(?) done. It is also done with an eye to
leaving a continuing tangible historical legacy for distant posterity.

Producing and selling postage stamps is a big business and it is no
doubt lucrative. I myself am torn on certain aspects of this
business. As for the Michael Jackson stamp, it is inevitable. What
ticks me off is that the Jackson family will ask for a monetary
payment for the use of MJ's image, and they will get it. This type of
extortion has been going on for a while now, from other parties (and
note that both the celebrites portrayed and parties recieving royalty
payments have been of all races - I'm not just picking on the Jackson
family); the BEP and the Postal Service should have never caved in to
these demands in the first place. I would suggest that if the Postal
Service is asked to pay to use the image of a recently deceased
entertainer or some such celebrity, then they really should just skip
to another subject. But then I could also turn right around and argue
that the Postal Service makes so much money from postage stamp sales
that why not pay to use the image and still make a lot of money???

Unlike a lot of other collectables that can only gather dust, MJ fans
(or Elvis, or Marilyn Monroe, etc.) can always use their stamps to
send a letter at some later date.

oly

Sorry if this is sent twice!

[oly]

On Jul 9, 1:14 pm, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:

How can you be out in Washington D.C., be some form of lobbyist, and

[mazorj]

"oly" <oly...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:18a1d566-b044-4dc5...@a7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

I understand perfectly the dynamics of how and why it happens, oly. I
also understand how and why people with substantial egos get elected
or appointed on the strength of their egos and which other big egos
they know, how and why a portion of my 401k went into the pockets of
egotistical corporate thieves, and how and why Michael Jackson has
consumed a hysterical American public and the media for the past two
weeks. That doesn't make any of them right!

< The medals undoubtedly cost more that they bring in in most
instances, but
it is the Republic's traditional way of saying thanks to certain
individuals for a job well(?) done. It is also done with an eye to
leaving a continuing tangible historical legacy for distant posterity.

IOW, ego candy for second- and third-rank civil servants.

< Producing and selling postage stamps is a big business and it is no
doubt lucrative. I myself am torn on certain aspects of this
business. As for the Michael Jackson stamp, it is inevitable. What
ticks me off is that the Jackson family will ask for a monetary
payment for the use of MJ's image, and they will get it.

A-o-o-w! I hadn't even thought about that. You're probably right.

< This type of
extortion has been going on for a while now, from other parties (and
note that both the celebrites portrayed and parties recieving royalty
payments have been of all races - I'm not just picking on the Jackson
family); the BEP and the Postal Service should have never caved in to
these demands in the first place. I would suggest that if the Postal
Service is asked to pay to use the image of a recently deceased
entertainer or some such celebrity, then they really should just skip
to another subject.

Amen. It should be an honor to be on a postage stamp, not another
source of revenue.

< But then I could also turn right around and argue
that the Postal Service makes so much money from postage stamp sales
that why not pay to use the image and still make a lot of money???

To answer that we'd to know how many of those stamps end up never
being used.

< Unlike a lot of other collectables that can only gather dust, MJ
fans
(or Elvis, or Marilyn Monroe, etc.) can always use their stamps to
send a letter at some later date.

Well, you can say the same for all the wretched coin issues, too.
That doesn't make them any more palatable in my book.

[oly]

On Jul 9, 3:44 pm, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message

> That doesn't make them any more palatable in my book.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Medals have been issued since the Renaissance for much the same reason
that the U.S. Congress issues medals today - proclaimation and
commemoration and recognition/reward.

The first acts of our Continental Congress included orders to both
Messrs. Franklin and Jefferson to secure the services of wonderful
French medalists to mark the first political steps and military
victories of our fledgling Republic. Many medals (not all) are
symbolically related to the concept of sovereignty. The images and
messages on medals were very important ways to spread news and the
likenesses of great men before the advents of photography and radio
and television. Now, it's more simply a traditional gesture. Coins
the same way, but circulating coins have stricter imperatives and
tolerances to meet the requirements of commerce, so the scope for
great artwork is less.

Medals are important historic artifacts and I'm glad they make them.
There are certainly boxes and boxes and boxes of them around my
abode. The staff of engravers up at Philadelphia and all their
equipment and supplies probably cost less than whatever passes for a
routine rounding error at the Bureau of the Budget.

oly

[mazorj]

----- Original Message -----
From: "oly" <oly...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.collecting.coins
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: Medals and Coins and Stamps, Oh My!

...

Medals have been issued since the Renaissance for much the same reason
that the U.S. Congress issues medals today - proclaimation and
commemoration and recognition/reward.

The first acts of our Continental Congress included orders to both
Messrs. Franklin and Jefferson to secure the services of wonderful
French medalists to mark the first political steps and military
victories of our fledgling Republic. Many medals (not all) are
symbolically related to the concept of sovereignty. The images and
messages on medals were very important ways to spread news and the
likenesses of great men before the advents of photography and radio
and television. Now, it's more simply a traditional gesture. Coins
the same way, but circulating coins have stricter imperatives and
tolerances to meet the requirements of commerce, so the scope for
great artwork is less.

Medals are important historic artifacts and I'm glad they make them.
There are certainly boxes and boxes and boxes of them around my
abode. The staff of engravers up at Philadelphia and all their
equipment and supplies probably cost less than whatever passes for a
routine rounding error at the Bureau of the Budget.

oly
===========================

No disagreement with anything you've said here. I don't have "boxes" of
medals but the few I do possess are for worthy subjects and have meaning for
me. One of my most prized items is the exceedingly handsome JFK medal with
a receipt dated 11/23/63. Another is a Gettysburg centennial medal
purchased at the time on one of my many trips there during my teenage
fascination with the Civil War. I have a few of the presidential series -
like Lincoln and Washington. Being half Polish, I have the Pope John Paul
II medal. (Call me sentimental, but although my mother wasn't a Secretary
of the Treasury she worked there so I happily bought the more recent U.S.
Treasury commemoratives.) Some stuff you acquire on its own merits, some
you just want and cherish for personal reasons.

Recent run-of-the-mill Secretaries of the Treasury and the likes of movie
actors and professional golfers aren't on the same planet let alone in the
same league. Yes, medals are a legitimate, traditional way to honor worthy
individuals and events. I just happen to hold a high standard for
"worthiness." So I was objecting as much to the selection of mediocre
subjects for our medals and stamps, which IMO cheapens the honor. The
relatively small waste of resources just adds injury to insult.