How did the old timers SPEND such gorgeous stuff?

topstuf

Ever wonder what it will be like 50-100 years from now when the ugly crap that is currently in circulation achieves "collector" (ugh) status?

I can envision being an old timer having a pocket full of seated lib or bust coins and admonishing store clerks "HEY! Handle that by the EDGE, you dolt!" as they slide it into the register or dump it in a sack.

Prooflike fields or satin smoothness and precious metal in everything you spent.

Allegorical images and true die sinking excellence. Sharp eagles and frost all over.

Now, with the junk we use every day, who cares what they do with it? It's all junk and has no imagination or honor or evidence of design competence.

Damn VISA cards are prettier.

Hey! Swipe that plastic GENTLY, you dolt!

nwcs

"Look! It's the 1999 Rhode Island quarter! Wow!!"

jonesy

Remove the Ugly ex presidents off our coinage. The Icon Rule!!! Bring Back the Icons!!!!
Another thing!! You want to circulate a dollar coin? Make the 8itch out of silver!! Real silver, not clad!!
Glenn

lclugza

Then as now, the old timers of 100 or 150 years ago ago probably thought "those darned modern coins will never be worth anything!" and probably concentrated on ancients, colonials, and very early (late 18th/early 19th century) U.S. coins. Even the proof gold coinage- highly prized today- had mintages averaging perhaps 90 coins per year per denomination (for the years 1858-1915).

ConstellatioCollector

Unfortunately, back then products were made with quality in mind and it was every tradesman's pride that showed through their workmanship. Today things are just mass produced and it's "get it out the door to market".

keets

perception is all important and you're looking at things through glasses that give you a distorted picture. you're trying to compare our hindsight view of past designs with their present day view of their current designs. not all that was minted in the ol' days of yore was received well. and so it will be in another 100 years.

al h.

nwcs

Yep, it was common to the people at the time ("them darn moderns!" they'd say). But people didn't have a problem spending them. Looking at the design issue, though, I'd say it was sporadic. Not many of the colonials are all that wonderful in design. And before that many of the designs were crude and striking was always an issue. And even some of the issues of the late 18th and early 19th didn't exactly enthrall everyone.

Hindsight is 20-20. And there might be some collector in the future who is glad that someone preserved a 1982-P washington quarter in MS-65!

ARCO

I agree. Even the lowly copper with its beautiful aging look as it turns a chocolate brown in circulation is relegated to a zinc coin not even worthy to touch mine or your hands!

Clad...take a new shiny clad state quarter and hold it up to a nice MS pre 65 Washington quarter, and look how much the older quarter just drips with silver luster. Yeah it is just amazing. The staid, listless designs do inspire...they inspire one to take a long nap!

Tyler

cladking

<< <i>

Clad...take a new shiny clad state quarter and hold it up to a nice MS pre 65 Washington quarter, and look how much the older quarter just drips with silver luster. Yeah it is just amazing. The staid, listless designs do inspire...they inspire one to take a long nap!

Tyler >>



Try the same with a gem burnished 1989-D quarter or a spectacular 1970. While the clad
may well be an acquired taste, the depth and quality of the design is basically the same.
Sometimes the luster on the clads can be better than the silver versions. I'm no fan of the
flatter designs being used now, but have to believe that in time collectors will just accept it
for what it is- - flatter design. In the meantime we should make our voices heard for better
quality and better design.