EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
5388

The production of the penny is unnecessary and should be stopped in the United States.

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
4 points
JustAnotherGuyJustAnotherGuy (PRO)
Thank you for accepting, and sorry for the late responses, I was very busy this week.
My Arguments
1. It costs more to produce it than it is worth.
2. Other countries have done it with success.
3.The penny has completely lost it's buying value
4. We've gotten rid of coins before.

1. It costs more to produce it than it is worth.

The cost to produce a penny is approximately 1.83 cents to make, and it is only worth 1 cent. This being so the government loses $55,000,000 doing this transaction. [1] Although this is basically zero compared to the current national debt, it would be a good start in lowering the debt.

2. Other countries have done it before.

Finland, New Zealand, and Canada have all ceased making one cent pieces for transaction [2]. They have all done this without harm to their economy, and it has gotten easier to make transactions with cash, as prices are rounded to the nearest 5 cents for cash users. (credit users still use one cent numbers, but they don't need pennies). [4]

4. The penny has lost a lot of value.
Back in the old days, people could buy things with pennies, but now with prices of things around 2-3 bucks, you can't buy anything with pennies. They're only good for collectors and such. [4]

3. We've gotten rid of coins before.

We used to have a half-cent piece, but that had lost all of it's value. The dime even is now worth about as much as the half cent was, so if even a coin with the value of a dime has been gotten rid of, then getting rid of the penny, would be a good decision.

Sources
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...(United_States_coin)
[2]http://coincollectingenterprises.com...
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org...(United_States_coin)
[4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UT04p5f7U (video)

Return To Top | Posted:
2014-03-22 06:00:48
| Speak Round
CitrakayahCitrakayah (CON)
1. This debate is over the existence of a one cent coin, not the exact form that coin will take. Therefore, while it is true that the current version of the penny costs more to produce than it is worth, it is also true that the composition of the penny does not even require an act of Congress to alter, if one is simply changing the percentages of nickel and copper[1]. While altering the composition to another metal (say, iron) would require an act of Congress, so would eliminating the use of the penny.

Worse, it isn't as easy as simply eliminating the penny and saving money--it would actually cost more to get rid of the penny[2]. Among other reasons, the nickel costs eleven cents to manufacture, and there are fixed elements to penny production and distribution that would not be eliminated simply by halting production. Assuming a doubling of nickel production and a lack of pennies, there would be a net cost of $10.9 million, compared to the current cost[2].

2. There is a small problem with that--businesses exert considerable power in the United States of America, and they will simply always round up rather than rounding to the nearest five cents. This will disproportionately hurt the poor, who often have to pay with cash rather than credit.

Pro cites a video from YouTube. I'd kind of like a source besides someone on YouTube claiming that there's no effect.

3. Irrelevant. Pennies are still used in change due to sales tax.

4. We got rid of the half-cent coin over a hundred years ago--different economy back then. Moreover, "we did it once" is not a valid reason to do it again.

  1. 1. http://www.usmint.gov/downloads/about/annual_report/2010AnnualReport.pdf
  2. 2. Navigant Consulting: Impact of Eliminating
    the Penny on the United States Mint's Costs and Profit in Fiscal year
    2011 by Rodney J. Bosco and Kevin M. Davis

Return To Top | Posted:
2014-03-26 12:34:59
| Speak Round
JustAnotherGuyJustAnotherGuy (PRO)
1. The price of copper has been rapidly going up, so even if the amount of copper in pennies were to be decreases, the price to manufacture a penny would eventually be more than the worth of a penny, thus making the manufacturing of the penny a burden on the economy once more.

As you can see from this graph the price of copper has been on an incline since 1987. Since it is highly likely that this trend will continue, the price to manufacture the penny will always remain high in relationship to the price that a penny is worth. (Sources: http://sutodoreh.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/copper-long-term.png)
Scenario:
The steps that the United States take to getting rid of the penny would also potentially make a net profit for the government. By simply stopping the production of the penny, the United States will save an amount of money. Laws will be put in place to regulate that stores will round to the nearest five cents (Or just having the prices with one cent incriments and round your total to the nearest five cents at the counter, again with laws enforcing this, but in the end, 4 or 3 cents isn't worth the time,) People can still use pennies to buy things, and as the stores recieve these pennies they would send them to the government, who would smelt them and sell the resources (as it is illegal for citizens to smelt pennies to sell copper). 

Note: Getting rid of the nickel as well as the penny could also be a solution to this, as the dime only costs 5.65 cents to make http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dime_(United_States_coin)

2. See above scenario for solution to this problem

3. Also see above scenario for solution

4. Although "we did it before" is not a reason to get rid of another coin, doing it before shows that it had realatively no effect on or economy.

Return To Top | Posted:
2014-03-31 10:22:13
| Speak Round
CitrakayahCitrakayah (CON)
1. This is why we would be making the penny out of something else entirely. Iron, for example. At the very least, this would delay the point at which the penny becomes unnecessary for a long time. Also worth noting is that, if inflation does continue, eventually we will have to replace every issued denomination, and have to start using hundred dollar bills on a regular basis. In which case, one might as well say that every single denomination is unnecessary, because at some point we will be using up thousands times more making it than not making it.

Pro then baldly asserts that the government would actually gain money by stopping the production of the penny, despite the fact that I demonstrated that it is not that simple. Evidence takes precedence over "common sense."

As for price rounding, I must point out that retailers will attempt to lobby so that regulations would favor them--they would want to round up to the nearest five or ten cents.

As far as four or five cents, I would say how much someone's time is worth is up to the person, and if they really don't think that a few cents is worth waiting a few seconds, then they can tell the cashier to keep the change or donate it to charity.

4. Do we know it had relatively little effect on the economy? Pro's only evidence is a YouTube video that does not give any actual evidence. Not to mention that we don't even know how widely it was used; people use pennies every day, so the economic effects would be greater than getting rid of something hardly anyone used. Wikipedia (which is at least as trustworthy as some guy on YouTube) says that they were tokens used for collecting sales tax, in which case it's the government taking the loss. Also worth noting is that we didn't really have industrial assembly lines set up back when the mill was created.

Return To Top | Posted:
2014-04-07 08:30:41
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
adminadmin
I'd love to but I need to know what causes it.

Seems to affect you more than most. Any reason why this might be?
Posted 2014-03-18 14:09:17
DTinfinityDTinfinity
edeb8 needs to fix that multiple-comment glitch.
Posted 2014-03-18 14:04:31
DTinfinityDTinfinity
Well, the only viable argument for the con side is that prices would go up because you wouldn't be able to get exact change.
Posted 2014-03-18 14:04:11
DTinfinityDTinfinity
Well, the only viable argument for the con side is that prices would go up because you wouldn't be able to get exact change.
Posted 2014-03-18 14:04:08
DTinfinityDTinfinity
Well, the only viable argument for the con side is that prices would go up because you wouldn't be able to get exact change.
Posted 2014-03-18 14:04:05
nzlockienzlockie
OMG YES!!
Our smallest coin is the 10cent piece and we're even starting to talk about getting rid of that!

I really hope someone picks this up - I'd love to hear an argument to keep it!
Posted 2014-03-18 13:09:15
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2014-05-01 06:49:43
adminJudge: admin    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: Citrakayah
2014-05-01 16:24:53
PinkieJudge: Pinkie    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: Citrakayah
2014-05-12 19:38:36
nzlockieJudge: nzlockie    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: Citrakayah
Reasoning:
FORFEITS!

Feedback:
This debate was really close. I was enjoying it.
Then the dreaded forfeits happened. Oh well.
1 user rated this judgement as exceptional
0 comments on this judgement
2014-05-14 20:13:34
ZaradiJudge: Zaradi
Win awarded to: Citrakayah

Feedback:
It's good to see a Citrakayah debate again. Maybe edeb8 is useful for something after all.

Anyway, other than the fact that it's blatantly obvious from the forfeits that a lot of con's arguments go unresponded to, I just like his responses more. Sure pro could've done a better job arguing the net costs, but even if he did then Con always had the out of "even if he's right, his impact really isn't actually an impact due to it's absolutely insignificant magnitude". It would be the equivalent of giving a dollar to the Red Cross and saying "I'm stopping world hunger!"
1 user rated this judgement as good
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 4 rounds
  • 8000 characters per round
  • Reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Community Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 1 week
  • Time to vote: 3 weeks
  • Time to prepare: None