Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 428 posts

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#91

Post by pletsch »

bumby wrote: post #53
stilley2 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a key difference between US policy & Canadian policy that I have informally noticed while growing up on the border (with family ties on both sides). My wife's Canadian and I'm American, and we've discussed this point too. My theory is that Canada's parliamentary system generally puts one party in charge of the executive and legislative, so it's easier for that party to get things done. Of course there are t…

So is that a bug or a feature of the US system? On one hand, beneficial change can be painstakingly slow. On the other, malevolent change can be stymied indefinitely Edit: clarify my statement was in reference to the US

Disclaimer: this is just my view as a Canadian, not sure if studies back this up.

I think it's a feature. We seem to move a lot faster and it doesn't always work, but for the most part, having MPs as the executive branch allows people at the top to legislate what they need to succeed.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#92

Post by seanmcdirmid »

Mister_Snuggles wrote: post #77
UI_at_80x24 wrote: post #5

Yes. Canada stopped producing pennies in the fall of 2012. [0] The sky didn't fall. There was no great debate, no public opinion polls and politicians swearing heartily about the demise of our great nation. (Ok that's probably not true. For too many politicians that's all they do.) There was resistance when Canada dropped the $1 bill in favour of a Loonie (a $1 coin with the image of a loon on it). People bitched abo…

Another thing to remember about Canada is that we don't use cash as much as the US. Cash accounts for less than half (44%), by volume, of transactions in Canada. I'm not sure what the split between Interac (direct debit from your bank account) and credit cards is, but the mechanics of the transaction are almost identical - Interac prompts you for an account to pay from, both prompt for your PIN. When you pay for some…

> Cash accounts for less than half (44%), by volume, of transactions in Canada.

That’s about where the USA is as well. Cash is used in 31% of consumer transactions. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/06/spike-the-dollars-obit-cash-...

Anecdotally I haven’t carried cash around in years.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#93

Post by MH15 »

At some point us in the US will have to figure out how to cope with the issues our Democracy has with making changes and overcoming momentum. It seems our government is uniquely unsuited in this capacity in comparison to other modern democracies as seen with healthcare, income inequality, and the recent pandemic response.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#94

Post by nicoburns »

DonHopkins wrote: post #86
klyrs wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But because of quarters you still probably need nickels. Only in the presence of dimes. That's why I say, cut them too.

Good point. Binary money is ideal. But you can get arrested (or shot if Black) for trying to spend a two dollar bill in America. Man arrested for using $2 bills at Best Buy - clip from The Two Dollar Bill Documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS3yjfefUD8 A $2 Bill At Taco Bell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbp-UyLH2ng Police Involved After Student Tries To Buy Lunch With $2 Bill https://www.forbes.com/sites/k…

We have a similar problem in the UK with Scottish bank notes. They're legal tender across the whole of the UK, but most shops in England have never seen them before.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#95

Post by beojan »

talideon wrote: post #76
stilley2 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a key difference between US policy & Canadian policy that I have informally noticed while growing up on the border (with family ties on both sides). My wife's Canadian and I'm American, and we've discussed this point too. My theory is that Canada's parliamentary system generally puts one party in charge of the executive and legislative, so it's easier for that party to get things done. Of course there are t…

I don't think that's the case myself. While I do think that the parliamentary system is better than the congressional system, I think it's more that the parliamentary system emphasises consensus-building and executive accountability more. This is especially apparent in countries where a form of proportional representation is used for elections.

> This is especially apparent in countries where a form of proportional representation is used for elections.

Proportional representation is almost a necessary condition for the parliamentary system to encourage consensus-building. More specifically, it's necessary that no party hold an absolute majority.

With first-past-the-post, you usually end up with one party having full control for one term, and no one to hold them accountable (particularly if you have the principle of parliamentary soverignity).

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#96

Post by bumby »

throw0101a wrote: post #80
bumby wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is that a bug or a feature of the US system? On one hand, beneficial change can be painstakingly slow. On the other, malevolent change can be stymied indefinitely Edit: clarify my statement was in reference to the US

> On the other, malevolent change can be stymied indefinitely When the party that made the "malevolent" change is kicked out, then whatever they did can be reverted very easily. Contrast that with: if passing anything is hard, and a "malevolent" change does manage to be rammed through somehow (e.g., one party controls things for a two-year period), then reversing it will also be very difficult.

I'm not wholly convinced the first statement is the case. It's probably true for some types of changes like Executive Orders than can be easily repealed. Others, like laws and judge selections, take much longer to revert. I wonder if this is due to the lobbying culture in combination to competing interests.

Somewhat humorous example: In response to the need for warm clothing in the Korean War, US lawmakers instituted an alpaca subsidy in 1952. This subsidy remained in place for over 40 years.[1]

I do think there’s evidence that your second statement is true. Bad policy takes a lot of political will to overturn.

[1] https://books.google.com/books?id=fV_SuDMHpOsC&pg=PA273&lpg=...

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#97

Post by filoeleven »

klyrs wrote: post #46

As an American living in Canada, I gotta say. Pennies and dollar bills SUCK. We have $1 and $2 coins and they're actually useful. Every time I visit home, I end up with piles of pennies and wads of stinky, tattered, overcirculated garbage bills. If you accumulate a pile $1 and $2 coins, nobody looks askance if you plunk down a stack of them. But god, the glares if you want to spend $20 in dollar bills. I say take it…

> I say take it further: nickels should go too, and probably dimes.

A US penny in 1913 has the purchasing power of 26 cents today, so I’d agree that dropping everything below the quarter makes good sense.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#98

Post by chrisseaton »

zeepzeep wrote: post #19
ShorsHammer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't understand why any country on Earth is still using paper for notes. Is basic materials science some bizarre foreign concept? And for anyone who thinks otherwise, I'm going for a swim with $300 in my pocket.

> I'm going for a swim with $300 in my pocket. Money isn't waterproof where you live?

Paper money isn't waterproof in the US.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#99

Post by snarf21 »

klyrs wrote: post #46

As an American living in Canada, I gotta say. Pennies and dollar bills SUCK. We have $1 and $2 coins and they're actually useful. Every time I visit home, I end up with piles of pennies and wads of stinky, tattered, overcirculated garbage bills. If you accumulate a pile $1 and $2 coins, nobody looks askance if you plunk down a stack of them. But god, the glares if you want to spend $20 in dollar bills. I say take it…

Exactly. When we retired the half-penny, it had a purchasing power that would equate to 10-15 cents today. Someone just needs to have the political will to do this. We should just have quarters and move dollar bills to coin only. So much cheaper to make and they last forever.

The reason we don't is that people hate change and politicians don't like to rock the boat. A lot of our issues today are not that we don't know how to solve problems, but that the politicians aren't willing to take them on.

Re: Is It Time to Kill the Penny?

#100

Post by hagy »

MH15 wrote: post #93

At some point us in the US will have to figure out how to cope with the issues our Democracy has with making changes and overcoming momentum. It seems our government is uniquely unsuited in this capacity in comparison to other modern democracies as seen with healthcare, income inequality, and the recent pandemic response.

I think the best approach is for the US to move more concerns to the state level. E.g., it would be great if states would start implementing their own universal healthcare for their residents.

States commonly have more internally aligned political goals and therefore can move quicker. It also has the benefit of allowing different states to experiment with different solutions and all states can learn from the results.

Lastly, inter-state mobility is much higher than inter-country and this will allow residents to congregate in a state that matches their political desires. E.g., if someone doesn't like the tax burden of states that provide more services then they can move to a state that provides fewer.

Post reply on HN