Why haven't I seen anything here about the government $5 million fraud against collectors
Conder101
Posts: 10,536 ✭
I just got the July 3rd issue of Coin World and was Surprised to see the story about the government havig taken five million dollars from the collectors under false pretences and that I haven heard one peep about it here.
It seems The government collected 5 million dollars in surcharges for the Lewis and Clark dollar sales with the promise that that money was going to go to the US Park Service. But now that the Park Service has been unable to come up the matching funds that the law requires before they can receive the surcharge money, the government has decided to give it to the Missouri Historical Society.
Now if you collect money on the pretext that it is going to go to one group and then after you've got it turn around and divert it to someting else that is fraud. That money was collected for a specific purpose. If it couldn't be used for that it should have been returned to the people it was collected from as much as possible. The mint has records of everyone who ordered those coins by mail, phone and online ad they should have had that money returned to them, not have it diverted to some other purpose.
But why hasn't anyone else mentioned this? Am I the only one who is annoyed by this blatent rip-off that would land the people of any other organization in jail and up on charges?
It seems The government collected 5 million dollars in surcharges for the Lewis and Clark dollar sales with the promise that that money was going to go to the US Park Service. But now that the Park Service has been unable to come up the matching funds that the law requires before they can receive the surcharge money, the government has decided to give it to the Missouri Historical Society.
Now if you collect money on the pretext that it is going to go to one group and then after you've got it turn around and divert it to someting else that is fraud. That money was collected for a specific purpose. If it couldn't be used for that it should have been returned to the people it was collected from as much as possible. The mint has records of everyone who ordered those coins by mail, phone and online ad they should have had that money returned to them, not have it diverted to some other purpose.
But why hasn't anyone else mentioned this? Am I the only one who is annoyed by this blatent rip-off that would land the people of any other organization in jail and up on charges?
0
Comments
I dunno...Michigan on vacation???
...the government has decided to give it to the Missouri Historical Society.
I said in a thread not long ago that adjusting the prices of already listed items for sale at the US MINT is a violation without congressional approval or authorization. The price of gold proofs was adjusted up when gold temporarily hit 700 and now in the new issue of Numismatic News, I see the mint will halt sales once again to LOWER the price to reflect MARKET conditions. We've already been made aware of the GOLD BUFFALO being adjusted DOWN. Stopping and starting sales after the fact is CRIMINAL. How come nobody is making a noise ? This place jumps on the bandwagon if someone sells a bad coin on ebay, but BIG ISSUES get swept under the rug.
Something is really fishy about the way them boys sitting in OUR THRONES are conducting OUR business in OUR country.
TD
The organization in fact could not raise matching funds so the funds went to another group associated with Lewis & Clark in some manner.....
As far as the prices of existing items, I thought that was entirely on the responsibility of the Treasury Department to determine the pricing of the coins, the surcharge was the only thing written into the law.....
I see nothing wrong with adjusting the pricing on the coins if the market calls for it.....
<< <i>Just to play devil's advocate, if the contribution was specifically contingent upon "x" occurring, and "x" does not occur, would the Treasury not therefore be released from the legal requirement to make the contribution as originally specified?
TD >>
excellent point TD
If you do this, I'll give you that. If you don't do that, you can't get this.
but still.... some things just ain't right ! like my english usage
Raven, you say you see nothing wrong with adjusting pricing as we go ? Come now.... there is a one year window. The coins are minted and packaged. There is a limit on the numbers. What sells , sells... what doesn't is melted (except in the case of Sackies and Kennedys from my understanding...only a couple of issues). The pricing structure is sent out via mailers from the US MINT..... I get them. Do you understand the logistics of these mailings, printings ? The money is in the millions of dollars, here.
My fuel costs for my business went from about 30 grand per year to 60 grand because of "PRICE" adjustments....
You cannot tell me that there is justification in raising the prices of the gas that is already sitting in a tank that a store owner already paid for. But his I can understand a lot easier than I can the US MINT's.... PERIOD>
I will not budge on my position with regard to MAJOR flaws in such activity from our own U.S. Mint or it's governing bodies whom should be servants of ours, the taxpayers.... Not our rulers, but our servants. Remember that ! These are public servants paid with YOUR tax dollars. WASTING lots of it.
H.R. 5401 "Lewis and Clark Commemorative Coin Correction Act" was enacted on 15JUN06 which permits the funds to go to the Missouri historical society.
S 1047 "Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2006" states that pricing for the Buffalo is as follows:
‘‘(5) SALE OF COINS.—Each gold bullion coin issued under
this subsection shall be sold for an amount the Secretary determines to be appropriate, but not less than the sum of—
‘‘(A) the market value of the bullion at the time of sale; and
‘‘(B) the cost of designing and issuing the coins, including labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, overhead
expenses, marketing, and shipping
That is just insane.....
I see prices change constantly with the metals and it has been wreaking havoc in the construction industry with the cost of copper and other metals.....
In my opinion they need to fix the stupid mailers, I get three to five of each mailer and I have never used one of them, I always order online and have done so for the entire time I have collected coins..... Put out a few catalogs a year and be done with it.....
Last time I checked selling the coins to collectors was being run of a for profit buisness, they don't have the right to increase the cost of things depending on what raw materials cost.....
Now, can we use a little logic in producing the mailers I get from the US MINT ????
DO NOT LIST THE PRICE OF ANY BASE METAL OR PRECIOUS METAL OR ANY ORB THAT YOU PRODUCE as it is dependent on the days market ... ( how many of us would buy from the mint with that stipulation ? ) I'd cancel ALL MY SUBSCRIPTIONS today.
uh huh, I might be a dumb ole country boy from nebraska, but i got good eyes.
NOTHIN WILL CHANGE MY MIND on this one.
as for the original post, I understand that it is written into law how the money is to be doled out from the surcharges, so I empathize with Conder's thinking, but understand the law.
As for profits, let me share a story with you.... I have thousands and thousands of dollars spent at the us mint over the years. EVERY SINGLE STATE QUARTER COSTS ME FORTY CENTS , let's not go there ! PLEASE. THE PROFIT IS BUILT IN, thank you
If you think a roll of quarters is worth sixteen dollars, I challenge you to be a buyer from the mint like me
Okay, how about an obsolete canvas bag ? $8.95 plus $4.95 for S&H ?
<< <i>But why hasn't anyone else mentioned this?
I dunno...Michigan on vacation???
...the government has decided to give it to the Missouri Historical Society.
First I heard about it. If it doesn't come up on google I don't know about it.
I don't deal with the subscriptions on any items.....
PEK, welcome to the fun and games
<< <i>If they can give it to the Missouri Historical society, why not just forget the stupid "matching funds" clause and give it to the National Park service in the first place. The Parks need all the help they can get.
I agree wiith you 100%. This is coming off like a penalty for the NPS. Makes you wonder which Missouri representative drove this one.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>There can't be any type of cost certainty with a precious metal driven object of any sorts.....
I don't deal with the subscriptions on any items.....
PEK, welcome to the fun and games
and while I agree wholeheartedly, as previously mentioned, even base metals would be subject to the extent of law
last I remember, there is copper and zinc and nickel in each coin and since they ( esp. copper) is going whacko, then ... well, um...
nevermind, I have to go check on a stone coated STEEL roof my guys are installing (I'll share pictures
<< <i>If they can give it to the Missouri Historical society, why not just forget the stupid "matching funds" clause and give it to the National Park service in the first place. The Parks need all the help they can get. >>
They didn't just give the money to the Missouri Historical Society, they still have to raise the matching funds. And they have waived the matching funds requirement in the past. Although they did catch some flak when they did so.
<< <i>if the contribution was specifically contingent upon "x" occurring, and "x" does not occur, would the Treasury not therefore be released from the legal requirement to make the contribution as originally specified? >>
Possibly, but if the money for the contribution was taken from the collectors on the promise that the contribution to X would take place, and due to x not being able to met the legal requirements to receive the money the Treasury can't make te contribution. Shouldn't the money then be returned to the collectors? If it was like an anonymous charity donation I could understand changing the recipient since you wouldn't know who to return the money to. But in this case you have a list of the donators and how much they donated. The money should have been returned or at least given the option of a return.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
this is most any government program and especially social security. our federal govt has been committing fraud for years and no one seems to even care. if you are going to be upset about something, this magnitude of this deception and theft is huge. legally, we are not entitled to our benefit but have to pay the tax anyway. what a crock.
<< <i>Everything seems legit, both moves are in accordance with legislation enacted by Congress and the President. >>
That's true, because they changed the law after the fact and after they already had the money, collected on the original pretext, in their hands.
To me this is no different than back in 2001 when the Red Cross solicited donations for the World Trade Center victims and then were found out to be diverting a significant portion of the earmarked donations to other projects including administration bonuses. Their defense was that their internal guidelines allowed them to divert donations to other projects if they had sufficient resources for the original project. Of course even thought they had the sufficient resources they continued soliciting for the WTC relief because they got more donations for that than their other projects.
<< <i>
<< <i>But why hasn't anyone else mentioned this?
I dunno...Michigan on vacation???
...the government has decided to give it to the Missouri Historical Society.
First I heard about it. If it doesn't come up on google I don't know about it.
It's Michigan's fault..............!!!!!!!