Bring back the half dime! No more pennies and nickels!

On Tue, 02 May 2006 19:15:35 -0400, Padraic Brown
wrote:

On 2 May 2006 13:20:56 -0700, "
wrote:

I guess I just have an inner revulsion against using steel and aluminum
in coinage. I suppose there were some in 1965 who didn't like
cupro-nickel.

Other reasons to change from nickels to half dimes besides
transportation cost:

1) Can you imagine the silver proof sets where all of the coins except
the sackies are 90% silver?
2) Less bulk in your pocket full of change.
3) A chance to introduce a new coin with totally new design, not
re-worked designs of dead presidents.
4) A sense of nostalgia in returning a retired denomination.

While I commend your proposal (and there's really no reason why the
Mint couldn't make half dismes for the present mint and silver proof
sets), I must disagree about the "totally new design" bit. You know
darn well we'll end up with some kind of special interest group being
appeased by getting its face on a coin!

Alternatively, we could round to tenths of dollars, bring back the
twenty cent piece and retire the quarter along with the penny and
nickel. However, as I said, the popularity of the quarter and the
vending machine business makes this unlikely.

Yeah, that one's pretty unlikely. Unless we keep the well entrenched
quarter but also add a new 20c piece that is yellow in colour (like
the old French 20c).

Or seven-sided like the British 20p...

take care,
Scott
"curves by Reuleaux"

http://www.cdscrapmetal.com/

http://www.cdscrapmetal.com/cdnewvideo.htm

--
"""Remove "zorch" from address (2 places) to reply.
http://www.sirius.com/


"Edwin Johnston" wrote in message
...
Dave Hinz wrote:
On 2 May 2006 10:23:27 -0700, wrote:
As of yesterday the melt value of the nickel exceeds five cents
according to www.coinflation.com . The zinc penny is not far
behind.

Any insight on where I could take copper pennies for melt? I've got a
sorting mechanism figured out now.


C&D Scrap Metal in Houston will pay you for your scrap in $2 bills.

wrote:

If pennies and nickels are eliminated, transactions will have to be
rounded. It would not be practical to round to the nearest tenth of a
dollar unless we also get rid of the quarter. However, the quarter is
the most popular and most recognized denomination we have.

Rounding to a tenth of a dollar would be as practical as rounding to
the penny was in the 1950s, and today's dime is worth less that the
penny was then. We didn't clamor for change for a penny (though it was
available, sort of, in Washington), and don't need change for a dime
now. What do you do with pennies? Many people just throw them away.

Do away with the penny, nickel and quarter, and come up with a useful
half-dollar. Maybe something a little larger and thicker than a
nickel, thirteen-sided, with Sitting Bull or Geronimo on it.

--
Stefano

Stefano MacGregor wrote:
wrote:


If pennies and nickels are eliminated, transactions will have to be
rounded. It would not be practical to round to the nearest tenth of a
dollar unless we also get rid of the quarter. However, the quarter is
the most popular and most recognized denomination we have.


Rounding to a tenth of a dollar would be as practical as rounding to
the penny was in the 1950s, and today's dime is worth less that the
penny was then. We didn't clamor for change for a penny (though it was
available, sort of, in Washington), and don't need change for a dime
now. What do you do with pennies? Many people just throw them away.

Do away with the penny, nickel and quarter, and come up with a useful
half-dollar. Maybe something a little larger and thicker than a
nickel, thirteen-sided, with Sitting Bull or Geronimo on it.

Time for top-to-bottom denomination reform, I'd say! :-D

Coins:
10¢
20¢
50¢
$1.00
$2.00
$5.00

(my design preference: Allegorical images of Liberty on obverses, eaglesin
various poses on the reverses and edge lettering (the 'IN GOD WE TRUST'
motto?) on the higher denominations.)

Banknotes:
$10.00
$20.00
$50.00
$100.00
$200.00
$500.00

(note the 1-2-5 progressions)

Will it happen? They made such a wholesale changeover in Europe in early
2002, it took about three years to make all of the needed coins.

Here, it likely makes too much logical sense to warrant any serious discussion
among USA politicians.

sigh...

--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________

Padraic Brown asked:

Saw the following posted to sci.lang -- any ideas what they are?
http://www.masseysonline.com/

Both of them are from the Indian state of Mysore during the time of
Tipu Sultan (1782-99 AD). Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver
rupee and 1218 on the copper 2 paisa. The dates are written with
the unit's digit at the left and indicate the number of solar years
from the birth of Mohammad. To convert to AD, add 572. Not rare or
valuable, but nice specimens.

- Jim

Jim Roberts wrote:
Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver rupee and 1218 on the
copper 2 paisa. [...] To convert to AD, add 572.

The Islamic calendar does not use a solar year, so while the "add 572"
rule works for modern dates, it's off by about a decade for these older
dates.

AH1218 is actually 1803

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_calendar
(See the table in the "Current correlations" section)

--
Jim Seymour

Jim Seymour wrote:

Jim Roberts wrote:
Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver rupee and 1218 on the
copper 2 paisa. [...] To convert to AD, add 572.

The Islamic calendar does not use a solar year, so while the "add 572"
rule works for modern dates, it's off by about a decade for these older
dates.

But the point I was making is that these are not AH dates. They use
an unusual form of the Islamic calendar that is based on the solar
calandar and starts with the birth of Mohammad. Unusual, but that's
actually what's going on here. This feature makes the coins a bit
unusual and interesting :-) ...

- Jim

"Jim Roberts" wrote in message
...
Jim Seymour wrote:

Jim Roberts wrote:
Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver rupee and 1218 on the
copper 2 paisa. [...] To convert to AD, add 572.

The Islamic calendar does not use a solar year, so while the "add 572"
rule works for modern dates, it's off by about a decade for these older
dates.

But the point I was making is that these are not AH dates. They use
an unusual form of the Islamic calendar that is based on the solar
calandar and starts with the birth of Mohammad. Unusual, but that's
actually what's going on here. This feature makes the coins a bit
unusual and interesting :-) ...


Actually, both calendars (AH and SH) begin with the Hegira by Mohammed from
Mecca to Medina in 622 CE. From that point they diverge, since AH is lunar
and SH, as you correctly point out, is solar.

Mr. Jaggers

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
"Jim Roberts" wrote:
Jim Seymour wrote:

Jim Roberts wrote:
Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver rupee and 1218 on the
copper 2 paisa. [...] To convert to AD, add 572.

The Islamic calendar does not use a solar year, so while the "add 572"
rule works for modern dates, it's off by about a decade for these older
dates.

But the point I was making is that these are not AH dates. They use
an unusual form of the Islamic calendar that is based on the solar
calandar and starts with the birth of Mohammad. Unusual, but that's
actually what's going on here. This feature makes the coins a bit
unusual and interesting :-) ...

Actually, both calendars (AH and SH) begin with the Hegira by Mohammed from
Mecca to Medina in 622 CE. From that point they diverge, since AH is lunar
and SH, as you correctly point out, is solar.

I'm no expert on Indian coinage, but I'm relying here on Craig, who is
pretty reliable, I think. He refers to these dates as "A.M.", not AH
or SH, and he says they're based on the number of solar years since the
birth of Muhammad. He says that Mysore switched over to this system
in 1787 AD, and they reversed the order of the digits at the same time
that they went to this unusual dating system. If the numbers were
lunar or were based on the Hegira, they would not give a date that was
within the reign of Tipu Sultan, so Craig almost has to be right, it
seems to me. But I could be wrong, as I'm really not very familiar
with these coins.

- Jim

"Jim Roberts" wrote in message
...
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
"Jim Roberts" wrote:
Jim Seymour wrote:

Jim Roberts wrote:
Both have clear dates, 1219 on the silver rupee and 1218 on the
copper 2 paisa. [...] To convert to AD, add 572.

The Islamic calendar does not use a solar year, so while the "add 572"
rule works for modern dates, it's off by about a decade for these older
dates.

But the point I was making is that these are not AH dates. They use
an unusual form of the Islamic calendar that is based on the solar
calandar and starts with the birth of Mohammad. Unusual, but that's
actually what's going on here. This feature makes the coins a bit
unusual and interesting :-) ...

Actually, both calendars (AH and SH) begin with the Hegira by Mohammed
from
Mecca to Medina in 622 CE. From that point they diverge, since AH is
lunar
and SH, as you correctly point out, is solar.

I'm no expert on Indian coinage, but I'm relying here on Craig, who is
pretty reliable, I think. He refers to these dates as "A.M.", not AH
or SH, and he says they're based on the number of solar years since the
birth of Muhammad. He says that Mysore switched over to this system
in 1787 AD, and they reversed the order of the digits at the same time
that they went to this unusual dating system. If the numbers were
lunar or were based on the Hegira, they would not give a date that was
within the reign of Tipu Sultan, so Craig almost has to be right, it
seems to me. But I could be wrong, as I'm really not very familiar
with these coins.

- Jim


I probably jumped on the keyboard too quickly, or at least without carefully
analyzing what you wrote. Craig is a good guy in my book, and I'll accept
your amendment as proposed.

Mr. Jaggers