It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
zinc filled, copper plated piece of undervalued, oxidized, worndown, stained, lincoln faced piece of monkey *#*# that they call money
1. The United States one cent piece should no longer be produced. It is a waste of our time and money to continue producing one cent pieces. It cost approximately 1.26 cents to manufacture each penny last year, and has taken up to 1.7 cents years prior.
Where the sentiment might land today, amid the financial crisis, is anybody's guess. Experts and officials are acutely attuned to the issue. Several bills now pending in Congress would allow the Mint to change the coin's composition, and one would require use of steel and copper coloring.
2. Many countries have done it, including Australia, France, Spain, the Netherlands , and New Zealand. New Zealand has been without it for over twenty years, and it did not cause any kind of Economic Collapse, as Truth Within has suggested.
The problem with this is that regardless of the cost of a nickel, and regardless of changing the composition of the one cent piece, he fails to address the heart of the issue we are debating-the ultimate value of the penny in today’s society.
Dr. Robert Whaples of Wake Forest University has done a study on local stores, both upscale and lower income areas. In this study the stores rounded the price of the item to the nearest increment of five. Dr. Whaples found that on average, the consumer actually gained a cent every forty transactions, which is effectively the same as breaking even for store and consumer alike.
Two things he (Truth Within) stated are true: it costs more than a nickel to make a nickel, approx 7.7 cents, and congress is discussing changing the composition of the one cent piece.
As as far as my opponents argument on the cost of producing and shipping the nickel, I would like to know where he gets his numbers from, but I'll humor his argument.
But he is ignoring the fact that the 3 million dollars lost is only 1/300 of the 9 hundred-million Dr. Whaples has estimated the US loses on the penny (and he is an expert in US economy, btw) every YEAR.
My opponent hasn't done his homework. He is clearly assuming that each price will be rounded and then sold. On the contrary, the system works on the basis that you round at the end of the ENTIRE purchase. For example. I go to the store to pick up a sick pack and a pack of smokes. The sick pack is 6.99, plus tax of course (8.25%), as well as the smokes. This figure can be somed up as (6.99+3.99)1.0825= 11.89.
My opponent’s argument on Point of Sales is completely incorrect. Anyone who has ever worked a POS machine knows that the prices are set by either store owner, or the corporate office/store manager, depending on the type of business. There is no law, no procedure, no software of any type that would prevent businesses from rounding to the nearest nickel.
Seattle's Penny Harvest campaign is run by Fremont non-profit, Solid Ground. The group is affiliated with Common Cents, a New York organization that started the fundraiser.
Nine hundred schools in Albany, New York, Nashville, Tennessee and the states of Colorado and Florida are also sponsoring Penny Harvest drives. In 2006, $770,000 was raised in those states.
In the Seattle area, 61 schools are collecting pennies. Last year 39 schools raised $41,000.
As much as I myself do not like the hassle of the penny, I am siding in favor of TruthWithin.
In terms of veracity of the argument, I feel TruthWithin provided a sobering need to take seriously the effects that removing the penny can have on our current economic situation. Until regulations and laws governing a "Swedish Rounding" system are in place, and tax structures in place that do not cause businesses more losses, I feel the penny cannot be removed.
Although I enjoyed the sarcasm and humor of his opening statement,
I do not feel that one_man24's general argument that the penny is just a useless piece of metal holds up when looking at the millions of dollars that are involved. It definitely has a value to our society in light of the problems removing it can entail. If it is valued in the economy, then it is valued in the society respectively. He stressed this was his prime argument, and I feel TruthWithin showed it does have value. Not in sentimentality, but in its viability in a weakened economy.
TruthWithin showed that the added stress on the already overpriced nickel is not justified while it is still overpriced. The nickel and the penny BOTH need to be made cheaper to produce in order to justify keeping them. But, the penny must be valued by society in order for them not to throw them away. Something that might well occur in a weakened economy.
Seeing that removing them can cause problems for business owners is an important consideration well expressed by TruthWithin. Taxes and POS software are serious potential loses and annoyances to consider.
Abusing a rounding system or lowering it for competition are canceled points made by each fighter. I felt this aspect of the argument didn't have enough study to support it by either fighter. And many million dollar figures where thrown here by different "interested" parties.
One_man24 showed there are some myths involved with the abuse by businesses of such a system while TruthWithin showed there are some hidden expenses in such transactions. The consumer saves 4 cents on a total purchase while the manufacturers and businesses have a potential gain. Also a somewhat mooted point.
One_man24 stated that credit cards wouldn't be subject to a rounding system, which actually hurt his argument because then businesses would be less likely to take cash.
I believe TruthWithin showed there are some illusions about how removing the penny will alleviate its annoyances simply by removing it, essentially because of the tax complications and potential problems of abuse.
With TruthWithins perspective in mind, I felt, sentimentality was a lessor argument with little to substantiate it besides a few collectors and coin counting business, nor were there any real estimates regarding what rounding up or down would cost the average consumer, but one_man24 didn't give a good enough reason to justify the 170 million dollar attitude of the spender, nor that that attitude would be reduced by going to the nickle.
In terms of the rebuttal, I am uncomfortable because it is clear that one_man24 had some problems to deal with at home which both fighters seem okay with.
Thank you for the opportunity and the learning experience.
I think that both debaters presented excellent arguments for their sides. I honestly think that they did such a good job that it made it very difficult to decide. Ultimately, I have to give the nod to TruthWithin. He/she just had a more polished approach to the debate, The references cited and rebuttals presented were just a little better than the opponent. I would probably chalk it up to experience.
Again, both did a great job but I have to give the win to TruthWithin.