HB 1269: Au Revoir to Useless Coins Act (Passed)

[Terry the Fat Shark]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Needed

[Terry the Fat Shark]

As stated, this needs a sponsor.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

EVERYONE READ THIS EYE OPENING POST: 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As stated, this is very much overstated, and should be looked at in perspective to everything (nickels cost about 9.4 cents, yet would be even worse to get rid of, and I hope no one here wants to). And according to Navigant's Report the Federal Government will actually LOSE money, without the penny:

First, the Mint's fabrication and distribution costs include fixed components that will continue to be incurred whether or not the Mint produces the penny.  Navigant estimates this fixed component at $13 million in FY 2011. Plus, there is $17.7 million in Mint overhead allocated to the penny that would have to be absorbed by the remaining denominations of circulating coins without the penny.

Second, under current Mint accounting, the nickel costs eleven cents to manufacture. In response to a 2006 question from the Subcommittee, the Mint put forward a scenario where nickel production doubled without the penny. It's hard to see how you save money by making more nickels that are losing more money. The data bears this out. Applied to FY 2011 cost and shipment data, the Mint would have incurred an additional net cost of $40.4 million without the penny last year.

Navigant concludes that with existing fixed costs, and the nickel substitution scenario outlined by the Mint, eliminating the penny would likely result in increased net costs to the Mint of $10.9 million, relative to the current state.

The penny's elimination would not eliminate government losses, and will actually increase the overall loss to the Mint due to increased production of the nickel and ongoing Mint overhead costs. Moreover, as stated, consumers would be hit with a "rounding tax", the last thing this Congress should consider with our current fragile economic climate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't doubt that transportation, of all currency, costs too much on our environment, but I would say that there, the focus should be making our cars (and trucks, and other transportation vehicles) more fuel efficient. I think that we should be focusing on the systemic problem of all of our transportation vehicles damaging our environment, not just the penny's transportation.

It changed my vote from Aye to nay on abolishing the penny in 2017.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Just FTR, I oppose this bill as well

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And this one:

But NeverAgain, OneJ has a long history of offering amendments he doesn't actually support, why should such be cause for delay?

Well, he said specifically, "I'll delay the amendment due to this discussion".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The claim that rounding will have no appreciable effect on the consumer is predicated on the notion that there is an equal 20% probability of purchase prices ending in a particular digit. In fact, a whole bunch of evidence suggests that the equal probability assumption is false (not saying that's your claim, just stating it for clarification). The 22-year old study published by Marketing Bulletin yet researched in '95 by Palmerston North (which I am unsure if we can go on due to it's age, and the fact the study was done in New Zealand.), states that it is a 61-25 split on endings in 9 vs. 5. So, even if we were going on this non-Atlasian study, 9 is still the overwhelming ending for pricers and vendors in New Zealand, and is no doubt even more popular in Atlasia.

A Congressional Testimony, by Raymond E. Lombra, Professor of Economics at Pennsylvania State University, stated that: "A careful statistical analysis based on the information available on the distribution of prices in the United States strongly suggests that, on balance, prices will be rounded up.
This rounding "tax" will have a significant adverse effect on consumers. A conservative estimate places the tax in the $600 million per year range." Prof. Lombra went on to state that the "
Federal Reserve estimates that those with incomes under $10,000 - $15,000, non-whites and Hispanics, and those adults with less than 12 years of education pay for more than half of their total purchases in cash. Since only cash transactions will be subject to rounding, it follows that the rounding "tax" will be regressive, affecting the poor and other disadvantaged groups disproportionately.".

Another study places a conservative estimate of the rounding tax on consumers at "totalling over $2 billion after five years," excluding purchases made by those under 18. This is a HUGE amount for us to say should be just laid upon the poorest among us.

So, is there a chance that a very few won't lose money from this, and in even rarer cases, gain some? Yes. But the vast majority of individuals, and disproportionately among those who need a leg up, will be losing hundreds of millions and billions out of their pockets.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

This still needs a sponsor.

[wxtransit]

And, another eye opening post, from the same source, but more recent:

I was the major reason we kept the penny in the "Currency of Atlasia Act" - I have changed my views since then and fully support the abolition of the penny. Estimates find that it would save over $100M in the first year.

No matter your feelings about the coin, it's costing the government way too much money in a time we're already operating with a deficit (which may or may not be a bad thing, but that's a whole other argument entirely, and either way, we shouldn't be wasting government money on a coin that people lose in their couch cushions and frankly do not use).

Some eye opening articles and videos, too:
https://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/30/its-time-to-kill-the-penny-fmr-us-mint-director.html
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/why-germany-is-taking-back-its
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/insider/why-doesnt-the-united-states-finally-get-rid-of-the-penny.html
https://www.mint.ca/store/mint/about-the-mint/phasing-out-the-penny-6900002
https://youtu.be/y5UT04p5f7U
https://youtu.be/nU4E6SSy5Yg

(Also, the Speaker should probably change "American coinage mints" to "Atlasian coinage mints" )

[Mr. Reactionary]

Im with Transit. Kill the penny.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

I care less about government spending than I do about a potential unintended tax on the poorest consumers. Has that argument been disproven as well?

[Mr. Reactionary]

I care less about government spending than I do about a potential unintended tax on the poorest consumers. Has that argument been disproven as well?

Pennies will still exist and be legal tender so I dont imagine much of an impact. We just wouldn't make new ones.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Hmm ok. I think I can support this

[Terry the Fat Shark]

If this doesn't have a sponsor in 24 hours, I will bring it to a final vote, unless there are objections to this.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

No objection

[OneJ]

Me. R’s response has now eased my concerns. I probably should’ve asked Razze’s question earlier, but it didn’t come across my mind. Since no one else is willing to sponsor, I’ll sponsor this and second Razze’s motion for a final vote.

[Pericles]

I third the motion for a final vote.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

so I guess we got a sponsor technically speaking but based on the language I take it the motion for a final vote is sustained....., so.... one more hour for objections.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

With 24 hours having passed without objection, a final vote is now open on this bill. Representatives will have 72 hours or until all Representatives have voted to vote on this bill.

[fhtagn]

Aye

[RFayette]

Aye

[Pericles]

Aye

[OneJ]

Aye

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Aye

[Lechasseur]

Aye

[OSR stands with Israel]

Aye

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Aye