Should the owner of a one of a kind rarity be restricted in what he/she can do with the coin?
SanctionII
Posts: 12,500 ✭✭✭✭✭
For example, the owner of the only legal to own 1933 Saint; or the owners of any of the 1913 Liberty Nickels.
Should their private property rights (which give them unrestricted use and control over the coin) be restricted to prevent them from doing whatever they will with the rarity? For example, should they be prevented from allowing the coin to leave the USA (ala what happens in England and other countries around the world); from allowing the coin to be raw (forced slabbing of designated rarities); or from storing the coin in less than ideal conditions (no allowing a copper coin to remain in Florida more than one week); and/or from hitting the coin with a sledge hammer.
Though we own a coin for not more than our lifetime, we all are temporary custodians of the coins we own. Are certain coins so important to society in general that the "public good" trumps "private property rights", thus justifiying the imposition on the owners of designated rarities rules and regulations created, adopted, implemented and enforced by "big brother" to preserve the rarity.
Should their private property rights (which give them unrestricted use and control over the coin) be restricted to prevent them from doing whatever they will with the rarity? For example, should they be prevented from allowing the coin to leave the USA (ala what happens in England and other countries around the world); from allowing the coin to be raw (forced slabbing of designated rarities); or from storing the coin in less than ideal conditions (no allowing a copper coin to remain in Florida more than one week); and/or from hitting the coin with a sledge hammer.
Though we own a coin for not more than our lifetime, we all are temporary custodians of the coins we own. Are certain coins so important to society in general that the "public good" trumps "private property rights", thus justifiying the imposition on the owners of designated rarities rules and regulations created, adopted, implemented and enforced by "big brother" to preserve the rarity.
0
Comments
Russ, NCNE
Well some coins are truly national treasures, with that said property rights are important.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
all your coins belong to us.
Interesting to see the replies to this thread and what they reveal about one's view on "private property rights" vs the "public good".
<< <i>No. The coin is MINE! I paid for it. If I want to take it into the furnace with me when they cremate me that is my choice. You want to do something else with it? Bring your checkbook and step up to the plate. >>
What he said.
I own it and I'll do whatever the heck I want with it. Few things, AND NONE OF THEM ARE COINS, are so important to society that they trump personal property rights. Period.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
Ill show you the business end of my 20 gauge, no joke
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>So none of you would have a problem if I owned all the 1804 dollars and smelted them all? >>
nope, do what you like with them. (if you legally owned them, that is)
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
<< <i>well i pee in my backyard. i dont suppose you would like to knock on my door and tell me i cant. no difference with a rare possesion. its like the guy who bought the bonds ball #756. he wanted to send it into space. well its his choice. >>
remind me never to move next door to you
<< <i>I guess I struck a nerve with my post
Interesting to see the replies to this thread and what they reveal about one's view on "private property rights" vs the "public good". >>
Rare coins have nothing to do with the "public good". They derive their value solely due to numismatics--by definition not a matter of the general populace of the country.
I have nothing at all against the government taking over a portion of land as eminant domain for a public roadway or for flood control, for example.
<< <i>
<< <i>I guess I struck a nerve with my post
Interesting to see the replies to this thread and what they reveal about one's view on "private property rights" vs the "public good". >>
Rare coins have nothing to do with the "public good". They derive their value solely due to numismatics--by definition not a matter of the general populace of the country.
I have nothing at all against the government taking over a portion of land as eminant domain for a public roadway or for flood control, for example. >>
I hear you! I've been trying to talk my local government into taking my back yard under eminant domain and building a Hooters there. So far, not much luck but i'm holding out hope!
<< <i>You must be a Democrat to have asked this question.
Why? I'm a flaming Democrat and I answered with a resounding no.
<< <i>no, this is the same with your home, car or anything you bought. If the owner of the 1804 buck wants to melt it then that's up o him regardless of how dumb that would be. That's not a logical argument anyway. >>
I happen to agree that its the owners right to do as he or she sees fit. However when it comes to houses and cars you can't just do what you want. I got into it with the city last year over my wife's car, which while in prefect working order was did not have current tags.. becuase it was no longer driven and was going to undergo some restoration. I was told by the city it could not sit in my driveway. My father can't paint his house without the premission of two commitees, becuase he is in a historic zone. I personally believe properity rights are trampled on daily and would never want to see that trampling move into the area of coins.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
<< <i>
Interesting to see the replies to this thread and what they reveal about one's view on "private property rights" vs the "public good". >>
You didn't strike a nerve with me. A good topic to bring up. "Public good" also falls under the umbrella of "eminent domain" which is another can of worms.
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>yeah nothing says no better than a 20 gauge comming out the front door!!!!!!!!!!! >>
A double barrel 12 gauge does.
The Declaration Of Independene was created under circumstances where there were two originals signed by the signatories. One was kept by the government and the other was kept by the guy with the big signature, John H. John's original passed down to his last living heir, Joe. The government original is destroyed by fire. Uncle Sam offers to buy John's original from Joe, who says no. Uncle Sam sues for condemnation. Joe responds by publicly stating he will burn John's original before it is taken by Uncle Sam.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"?
If you answer no, then you acknowledge that there should be and are limits on the extent of "private property rights" and that the issue merely becomes determining where you draw the line.
As applicable to coin rarities (you pick the coin(s)), do any of them fall on the "public good wins" side of the line, or do all of them fall on the "private property wins" side of the line?
<< <i>Let me ask you to answer a hypothetical.
The Declaration Of Independene was created under circumstances where there were two originals signed by the signatories. One was kept by the government and the other was kept by the guy with the big signature, John H. John's original passed down to his last living heir, Joe. The government original is destroyed by fire. Uncle Sam offers to buy John's original from Joe, who says no. Uncle Sam sues for condemnation. Joe responds by publicly stating he will burn John's original before it is taken by Uncle Sam.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"?
If you answer no, then you acknowledge that there should be and are limits on the extent of "private property rights" and that the issue merely becomes determining where you draw the line.
As applicable to coin rarities (you pick the coin(s)), do any of them fall on the "public good wins" side of the line, or do all of them fall on the "private property wins" side of the line? >>
the Declaration of Independence should be protected, IF it were the last copy. it applies to every single American, living or otherwise. Numismatic rarities are just that, coins that have a face value (and a collector value) and were intended to be used, spent and treated as a piece of disposable commerce. There is little "need" for these coins outside collector circles.
<< <i>Let me ask you to answer a hypothetical.
The Declaration Of Independene was created under circumstances where there were two originals signed by the signatories. One was kept by the government and the other was kept by the guy with the big signature, John H. John's original passed down to his last living heir, Joe. The government original is destroyed by fire. Uncle Sam offers to buy John's original from Joe, who says no. Uncle Sam sues for condemnation. Joe responds by publicly stating he will burn John's original before it is taken by Uncle Sam.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"?
If you answer no, then you acknowledge that there should be and are limits on the extent of "private property rights" and that the issue merely becomes determining where you draw the line.
As applicable to coin rarities (you pick the coin(s)), do any of them fall on the "public good wins" side of the line, or do all of them fall on the "private property wins" side of the line? >>
See my answer above as to the relationship between "rare coins" and the public good. As for the original copy of the Declaration you refer to above then yes, in this case I do believe it trumps the private property rights of the owner. ALL American citizens benefit from the D of I; the only citizens who actually benefit from rare coin ownership are those owners. The vast majority of the populace couldn't care less about an 1804 dollar.
<< <i>For example, the owner of the only legal to own 1933 Saint; or the owners of any of the 1913 Liberty Nickels.
Should their private property rights (which give them unrestricted use and control over the coin) be restricted to prevent them from doing whatever they will with the rarity? For example, should they be prevented from allowing the coin to leave the USA (ala what happens in England and other countries around the world); from allowing the coin to be raw (forced slabbing of designated rarities); or from storing the coin in less than ideal conditions (no allowing a copper coin to remain in Florida more than one week); and/or from hitting the coin with a sledge hammer.
Though we own a coin for not more than our lifetime, we all are temporary custodians of the coins we own. Are certain coins so important to society in general that the "public good" trumps "private property rights", thus justifiying the imposition on the owners of designated rarities rules and regulations created, adopted, implemented and enforced by "big brother" to preserve the rarity. >>
Yeah, I think they are restricted from allowing Lord Mav-- to get ahold of it. There are enough holey coins around and you know if he got it there would be one more on his cap.
ZeroHedge makes debut at White House press corps briefing
<< <i>Let me ask you to answer a hypothetical.
The Declaration Of Independene was created under circumstances where there were two originals signed by the signatories. One was kept by the government and the other was kept by the guy with the big signature, John H. John's original passed down to his last living heir, Joe. The government original is destroyed by fire. Uncle Sam offers to buy John's original from Joe, who says no. Uncle Sam sues for condemnation. Joe responds by publicly stating he will burn John's original before it is taken by Uncle Sam.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"?
If you answer no, then you acknowledge that there should be and are limits on the extent of "private property rights" and that the issue merely becomes determining where you draw the line.
As applicable to coin rarities (you pick the coin(s)), do any of them fall on the "public good wins" side of the line, or do all of them fall on the "private property wins" side of the line? >>
If the gov't can't protect the 1st original from fire, why should we trust them with the 2nd one?
commoncents123, JrGMan2004, Coll3ctor (2), Dabigkahuna, BAJJERFAN, Boom, GRANDAM, newsman, cohodk, kklambo, seateddime, ajia, mirabela, Weather11am, keepdachange, gsa1fan, cone10
-------------------------
Great Britain does this sort of this when certain kinds of collectibles (particularly statues or paintings of unusual quality) come up for auction in London---private buyers cannot necessarily take possession of their purchases because the state has the authority to take possession of the item in question if it can match the winning bid.
<< <i>The Declaration Of Independene was created under circumstances where there were two originals signed by the signatories. One was kept by the government and the other was kept by the guy with the big signature, John H. John's original passed down to his last living heir, Joe. The government original is destroyed by fire. Uncle Sam offers to buy John's original from Joe, who says no. Uncle Sam sues for condemnation. Joe responds by publicly stating he will burn John's original before it is taken by Uncle Sam.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"? >>
As any first year law student will tell you, hard cases make bad law. The law you propose would allow government to intrude into private property in a manner more egregious than what is done currently. If the public interest prevents you from destroying your property, doesn't that also suggest that the best party to hold that property in the most secure manner is the government? In which case, please turn in your rarities, gentlemen.
In this country (unlike certain others) we make the well-founded assumption that economic self-interest makes laws like the one you proposed unnecessary even where people agree that rarities "should be" preserved. Folks very rarely - almost never - intentionally destroy things that they own that have significant value. You don't need a law to tell people for that, any more than you need a law telling folks not to stick an icepick in their own eye. Or a law telling people not to flush their money down the toilet. Self-preservation is a wiser governor than our elected representatives can ever be.
<< <i>Let me ask you to answer a hypothetical.
Question: Does Joe's "private property rights" trump the "public good" to justify Uncle Sam taking John's original"?
>>
You need to define "Public Good".
In the eyes of a historian the document may be priceless and in the eyes of a numismatist a particular coin may be a beautiful rarity worthy of preservation at all costs and yet neither of these objects in and of themselves improves the overall quality of life to the general public or otherwise contributes to the general well-being of the average citizen.
Conversely, the errosion of private property rights is something that is detrimental to all of society regardless of one's socioeconomic status.
If you do something stupid and melt it, well so it goes. How is it any different from people cracking open mint and proof sets and inevitably getting finger prints, etc on them. There's a reason that old coins are rarities , they don't last forever, and we likely lose a few more every year due to neglect, environment, etc.
Nothing lasts forever. Doesn't the Smithsonian or the National Archives have a complete set of US coins?
commoncents123, JrGMan2004, Coll3ctor (2), Dabigkahuna, BAJJERFAN, Boom, GRANDAM, newsman, cohodk, kklambo, seateddime, ajia, mirabela, Weather11am, keepdachange, gsa1fan, cone10
-------------------------
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I agree with many of the others, if you buy a coin, and it's the only one known of it's kind, it's still yours to do what you want with it.
If you do something stupid and melt it, well so it goes. How is it any different from people cracking open mint and proof sets and inevitably getting finger prints, etc on them. There's a reason that old coins are rarities , they don't last forever, and we likely lose a few more every year due to neglect, environment, etc.
Nothing lasts forever. Doesn't the Smithsonian or the National Archives have a complete set of US coins? >>
They are missing among others..
1894-S Dime
1876-CC 20 Cent Piece
1870-S Seated Dollar
1885 Trade Dollar
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
I really like your comments. They get right to the heart of the matter. Human nature and the competitiveness within us are much more capable of promoting our health and properity than government does.
Self reliance, freedom, free market capitalism increase the likelihood that an individual will be able to care for his self, her self and his/her loved ones, to the benefit of all society.
A lack of self reliance, a nanny state where government provides for ones needs and a populace with a substantial percentage expecting/believing that government should take care of and provide for their needs benefits only those who are in charge of the programs that are put in place to care for you.
No offense, but some of the questions you both come up with ...............
The answer to this one, of course, is NO
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>I guess I struck a nerve with my post
Interesting to see the replies to this thread and what they reveal about one's view on "private property rights" vs the "public good". >>
What "public good" for coin collecting? There is no "good" for the public...only for those interested. Big difference, imho.
Public "good" is air quality. Water quality. Etc etc etc.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I do think we should support the ANA, Smithsonian and other museums. Not only do they preserve important artifacts they display them to the general public who may never get to see anything like that otherwise.
Longacres alt?
Not moi.
I am just a real estate lawyer/coin collector who finds, on many occasions, that Longacre's posts are so far beyond my mental abilities that I have no way to respond to them.
Must be his dealing daily with the nuances of the IRS Tax Code and IRS Regulations that elevates his grey matter into the upper stratosphere, far beyond the grey matter of mortal men.
-David