The Instigator
dumbocrat
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Themeaman909
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Should the penny still be minted?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Themeaman909
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 910 times Debate No: 83546
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

dumbocrat

Pro

The penny should be made still because it makes a more exact form of payment. Without the penny the US would have to round up because you would be able to pay just one penny. The nickle would be the smallest pay
Themeaman909

Con

The penny depletes the governments money by its production cost. It costs 2.4 cents to make this form of currency. Some may know that in some countries, the form of the one cent ( or singular coin currency) has stopped being produced. I found information on a website, http://www.economist.com..., that explains that the Canadian government has stop creating pennies. The article they posted said, "The Canadian penny has been eliminated because it is a waste of both money and time. Inflation has reduced its purchasing power by 95% since it was first minted domestically in 1908: back then a cent could buy goods that would cost C$0.20 today, in other words. Once a small coin can no longer be used to buy individual items, but is used only to make change, it becomes more trouble than it is worth. Canadian pennies cost 1.6 Canadian cents to manufacture, and the government expects to save C$11m a year by eliminating them. But that sum, equivalent to 0.0006% of GDP, is small change. The real reason to eliminate pennies is that their feeble purchasing power means dealing with the coins, and making change to the nearest cent, is a uneconomic waste of time for consumers, retailers and small businesses. People instinctively recognize this, which is why pennies pile up in drawers, in jars and on bedside tables. The mint then has to issue more of them. "Pennies take up too much space on our dressers at home," said Mr Flaherty. "We will, therefore, stop making them." The article also briefly explains how pennies are still circulating, but are not being produced. An issue that people find on this topic is also addressed, "The same arguments apply to the United States penny, which costs 2.4 cents to make. But eliminating it would result in greater use of the five-cent coin, the nickel, which costs 11.2 cents to produce. So the American penny survives, at least for the time being." The topic can extend further to removing all forms of coin currency. This would create less metal consumption, cost less for governments, and advance our country into the future with the use of online currency. The topic can be debated further, but advancement is necessary for the success of a nation, and we only get one environment to take care of.
Debate Round No. 1
dumbocrat

Pro

With the elimination of coins there isn't a real value of money anymore. It becomes only cotton with numbers on it. With no real value it becomes worthless in the future at some point. Pennies are a symbol that our currency isn't just cotton they say that it can also be collected and has metal value. The US dollar's value depends on suppy and demand. The demand will decrease without the penny because it won't be as exact and therefor not as useful as it was before. So it will speed up the value depletion if the penny is eliminated along with other coins. With a lower money value the government becomes less rich, maybe even less than it was when coins were minted. It would be counter productive. A lot of US citizens oppose this decision to stop minting the penny.
Themeaman909

Con

How could money lose value because coins, a simple and ancient form of currency, are eliminated? Exactness is a solvable conflict by technological means. I will propose a eccentric or outrageous solution for those who think that exactness in the form of physical currency is essential to a nations success. The government could print small bank notes (bills) that have the value of coins. Sounds insane? Think about it in a more depth strain of thought. Metals are more expensive than cotton (which forms dollar bills) and it might even be cheaper or equal to one cent ( at least for pennies). Also, the bills could be produced like dollar bills. The people could turn in there coins to government centers for 110% of there value, thus allowing them and the government to profit. Metals industries could get a slight and minor boost of supplies from this action. I think the people would accept it, because imagine carrying 2cm by 2cm (cm=centimeter) sips around instead of heavy metal coins?
Although coins are more classy, they could still be kept as collector items and thus boosting the antique market. Exactness is confirmed and other various boosts are possible with this strange, but thoughtful method.
Debate Round No. 2
dumbocrat

Pro

If the US used cotton bill for pennies then the price would go up for that making it possibly more expensive then zinc at that point because they both rely on supply and demand so the price of zinc might go down because they government wouldn't need it as much. Also the price of cotton would most likely rise because it would be used more.
With the new penny bills the penny would degrade more making it less circulated and less useful. Pennies are the most circulated physical currency. They would most likely not be accepted by stores and companies because they are a new bill. The Sacajawea coin wasn't accepted by most salesmen because it was a new type of coin. A penny bill probably wouldn't be accepted either because it would be a new bill
Themeaman909

Con

The Sacaqawea coin was not accepted for different reasons. If people saw the benefits of my idea, then they would want to carry around lightweight coin bills that would be more economically efficient than coins. I understand that the cotton market will go up, but the coin bills could be quite small, only 2 cm by 2 cm in size. This would reduce cost. Also, pennies would still remain in circulation for a small while, so the government could cut back on the cost of making them for a short time. And as probably known but not considered, most pennies sit around in a drawer forever and do nothing. To also solve this problem, we can decrease the amount of coin bills created in order to make it so they don't suffer the same fate as coins and sit around rotting. I also greatly understand that a new, huge change like this would be hard for the public of America to accept, but who said it had to be quick? As stated above, the change may be slow as in that pennies would be slowly replaced instead of instantly confiscated from the public. I believe that this change isn't the only option that IS available to this conflict, and that anyone reading this should keep an open mind in what solutions they can come up with. Fellow innovators, state a different or better plan to remove pennies ( or all coins) efficiently and effectively in the comments if you can.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Themeaman909 1 year ago
Themeaman909
The "sips" i wrote in my second debate was a misspell. I actually meant "slips" instead. because imagine carrying 2cm by 2cm (cm=centimeter) [should say SLIPS] around instead of heavy metal coins?
Posted by Themeaman909 1 year ago
Themeaman909
I think a detailed argument is essential to back up a claim.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
dumbocratThemeaman909Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed how the metal coin penny is replaceable by several cheaper alternatives to provide exact change. Pros only defense was that he thought it would drive up the price of cotton, and he didn't think stores would accept a new type of official US currency. Because pro didn't back up his rebuttals, the resolution could not be affirmed and is thus negated.