@tatomuck18 Not really the point I was trying to make, though, was it? If you paid attention, I was referring to the fact that the penny has a material value which is comparable to its trade value - something which is not true for just about any other currency. In that way, it is ideal, as it cannot be devalued by inflation. The penny will always be worth something, as opposed to paper money (for an example, I refer you to the Zimbabwean dollar).
With a dollar vs 100 dollars its true that it is what we value it at. $1 vs a $100 dollar bill are basically the same materials to create the currency yet its obvious $100 is worth more because of the print on the bill but the bill itself is paper and ink the same as the dollar. Anyways my mind is going to take a shit on me for thinking this in depth but nice point you make with our currency. A $100 should have some kinda gold printed on it so it will retain physical value if shit goes wrong
Never thought of this from your pov. The material the currency is on in its physical form should be worth what it is noted for. The other metals that combine other coins would cost more to break down and separate to extract each metals value than it would be worth which is kind of what your initial argument was on the penny costing more to create than its value.. Damn dude that is some deep shit I never thought of but in its basic structure you're right. cont'd
Weight isn't really the issue. I'm discussing the abstract, the idea. Pennies are better in this case because they retain close to their full value even in a currency collapse scenario. This is not true of nickels, as nickels are a combination of metals (75% copper, 25% nickel). It is costly to separate the metals from each other, and even then the raw materials are worth less than half the face value of the coin.
If the penny is really worth something, what can you buy with it? You can barely get a candybar for a DOLLAR!
tatomuck18 1 year ago
@tatomuck18 Not really the point I was trying to make, though, was it? If you paid attention, I was referring to the fact that the penny has a material value which is comparable to its trade value - something which is not true for just about any other currency. In that way, it is ideal, as it cannot be devalued by inflation. The penny will always be worth something, as opposed to paper money (for an example, I refer you to the Zimbabwean dollar).
AtheistUndergrad 1 year ago
With a dollar vs 100 dollars its true that it is what we value it at. $1 vs a $100 dollar bill are basically the same materials to create the currency yet its obvious $100 is worth more because of the print on the bill but the bill itself is paper and ink the same as the dollar. Anyways my mind is going to take a shit on me for thinking this in depth but nice point you make with our currency. A $100 should have some kinda gold printed on it so it will retain physical value if shit goes wrong
mixwell1983 2 years ago
Never thought of this from your pov. The material the currency is on in its physical form should be worth what it is noted for. The other metals that combine other coins would cost more to break down and separate to extract each metals value than it would be worth which is kind of what your initial argument was on the penny costing more to create than its value.. Damn dude that is some deep shit I never thought of but in its basic structure you're right. cont'd
mixwell1983 2 years ago
How much would $1000 in pennies weigh? Would nickles be a better option?
Signofthedollar 2 years ago
Weight isn't really the issue. I'm discussing the abstract, the idea. Pennies are better in this case because they retain close to their full value even in a currency collapse scenario. This is not true of nickels, as nickels are a combination of metals (75% copper, 25% nickel). It is costly to separate the metals from each other, and even then the raw materials are worth less than half the face value of the coin.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago