>>I think that the set should include every metal known to man including the toxic and radioactive ones. Let us have a set to end all sets.<<
I think the problem is too many coins with different themes. We could combine themes into a single coin and ease the strain on collectors' wallets. For example, in 2009 we could have a coin with the following images:
Obverse: A bald eagle landing on a buffalo being ridden by Lincoln.
Reverse: A map of the 50 states, with each state containing an image of a different president (and his spouse, if any) standing in a national park. Presidential spots #45 through #50 could be occupied by the six most recent First Dogs or First Cats, whichever is more photogenic.
I think a dime would be appropriate, we haven't had any commemorative dimes yet.
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">So the way I read this is they are proposing;
1) Unlimited 1 ounce Bullion type UHR palladium coins in both proof & uncirculated versions. All to be minted any where except West Point.
2) 15,000 West Point UHR 1 ounce palladium coins to be sold in sets with a gold version of the same design.
All to be made in 2009.
Interesting note is that the weight and purity must be on the rim of the bullion version but it is not specified that it must be for the numismatic coin. As specific as the language is I do not know what to expect. I would think they would go ahead and put it on both coins.
The other very interesting thing is that as a rider to the bill they are calling for a study on the counterfeiting of coins. The even specify the study must include whether or not "Graded" coins are be counterfeited also.
I agree with everyone else that it makes no sense to include the "West Point" version (15,000) in a 2 coin set with the gold coin. The 2 coin set will just be too expensive....WHY???? It sounds like this was written prior to the gold coin being minted, since they refer to the gold version only as a possibility....Maybe now that the gold version is out and available as a single they will drop this set requirement.</SPAN>
For those of us that are currently unemployed I think a Copper UHR would be most welcome. And as long as we're going down that road anyway, how about a Nickel version also.
And throw in an Aluminum version just for good measure.
<< <i>I think that the set should include every metal known to man
including the toxic and radioactive ones. Let us have a set to
end all sets.
We could even have a set composed of assorted hard cheeses. >>
"The camembart's a bit runny, sir!"
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
(4) DISTRIBUTION IN SETS AND OTHER COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS- If the Secretary chooses, in accordance with subsection (i), to mint and issue a gold bullion coin that bears the same design as the ultra-high relief numismatic coins described in paragraph (1)(B)--
bullion... although they seem to use bullion and numismatic rather loosely in the law and define them differently for different purposes in various places of the code.
I'm hunting down a current version of subsection (i), the link provided is only current to sometime in 2007. >>
Ahhh.....
Moy and Paulson issued the UHR under the authority of no new law, but under the authority of subsection (i), paragraph (4), subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(i) (4) (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary of the Treasury may change the diameter, weight, or design of any coin minted under this subsection or the fineness of the gold in the alloy of any such coin if the Secretary determines that the specific diameter, weight, design, or fineness of gold which differs from that otherwise required by law is appropriate for such coin. (B) The Secretary may not mint any coin with respect to which a determination has been made by the Secretary under subparagraph (A) before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date a notice of such determination is published in the Federal Register.
Just give 30 days notice of the change in the Federal Register and they can change any coin! (the $20 UHR is a different version of an existing gold coin, just with different face value, size, weight, design, etc. !!! )
calling all of them to be "numismatic" for the purposes of sections... forces sale proceeds to go to special funds.
reading other subsections of Section 5112 where the above came from and where the Palladium UHR is going, it is clear they are talking about the UHR minted by Moy-Paulson. >>
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....
if the UHRs were minted under the above authority where they can change any coin.... what coin did they change and does that mean the 'previous version' can't be made this year?? or do they just give 30 days notice and change it back?
<< <i>What ever happened to this? Will there be a Palladium coin? >>
Great thread!
Thanks for the resuscitation.
No one ever asked MrEureka why he believes paladium is undervalued. It is quite scarce in comparison to much more valuable metals but there are quite few specific uses. In addition to being rare it is being consumed so if specific uses develop in the future it could become quite valuable simply on the basis of being rare.
It's great they are looking at the counterfeiting problem. There are existing laws which can be enforced most probably but if it takes this then fine. I might be con- cerned with driving these operations underground. While the quantity would de- crease the quality might soar.
Comments
including the toxic and radioactive ones. Let us have a set to
end all sets.
We could even have a set composed of assorted hard
cheeses.
Camelot
<< <i>any clarification yet? >>
see my earlier post.
the 15,000 would be in a two coin set.
I think the problem is too many coins with different themes. We could combine themes into a single coin and ease the strain on collectors' wallets. For example, in 2009 we could have a coin with the following images:
Obverse: A bald eagle landing on a buffalo being ridden by Lincoln.
Reverse: A map of the 50 states, with each state containing an image of a different president (and his spouse, if any) standing in a national park. Presidential spots #45 through #50 could be occupied by the six most recent First Dogs or First Cats, whichever is more photogenic.
I think a dime would be appropriate, we haven't had any commemorative dimes yet.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The 2009 gold UHR fits in well with my double eagle collection. A palladium coin does not.
1) Unlimited 1 ounce Bullion type UHR palladium coins in both proof & uncirculated versions. All to be minted any where except West Point.
2) 15,000 West Point UHR 1 ounce palladium coins to be sold in sets with a gold version of the same design.
All to be made in 2009.
Interesting note is that the weight and purity must be on the rim of the bullion version but it is not specified that it must be for the numismatic coin. As specific as the language is I do not know what to expect. I would think they would go ahead and put it on both coins.
The other very interesting thing is that as a rider to the bill they are calling for a study on the counterfeiting of coins. The even specify the study must include whether or not "Graded" coins are be counterfeited also.
I agree with everyone else that it makes no sense to include the "West Point" version (15,000) in a 2 coin set with the gold coin. The 2 coin set will just be too expensive....WHY???? It sounds like this was written prior to the gold coin being minted, since they refer to the gold version only as a possibility....Maybe now that the gold version is out and available as a single they will drop this set requirement.</SPAN>
And throw in an Aluminum version just for good measure.
<< <i>I think that the set should include every metal known to man
including the toxic and radioactive ones. Let us have a set to
end all sets.
We could even have a set composed of assorted hard
cheeses. >>
"The camembart's a bit runny, sir!"
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm still puzzling over this:
(4) DISTRIBUTION IN SETS AND OTHER COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS- If the Secretary chooses, in accordance with subsection (i), to mint and issue a gold bullion coin that bears the same design as the ultra-high relief numismatic coins described in paragraph (1)(B)--
bullion... although they seem to use bullion and numismatic rather loosely in the law and define them differently for different purposes in various places of the code.
I'm hunting down a current version of subsection (i), the link provided is only current to sometime in 2007. >>
Ahhh.....
Moy and Paulson issued the UHR under the authority of no new law, but under the authority of subsection (i), paragraph (4), subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(i)
(4)
(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary of the Treasury may change the diameter, weight, or design of any coin minted under this subsection or the fineness of the gold in the alloy of any such coin if the Secretary determines that the specific diameter, weight, design, or fineness of gold which differs from that otherwise required by law is appropriate for such coin.
(B) The Secretary may not mint any coin with respect to which a determination has been made by the Secretary under subparagraph (A) before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date a notice of such determination is published in the Federal Register.
Just give 30 days notice of the change in the Federal Register and they can change any coin!
(the $20 UHR is a different version of an existing gold coin, just with different face value, size, weight, design, etc. !!! )
calling all of them to be "numismatic" for the purposes of sections... forces sale proceeds to go to special funds.
reading other subsections of Section 5112 where the above came from and where the Palladium UHR is going, it is clear they are talking about the UHR minted by Moy-Paulson. >>
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....
if the UHRs were minted under the above authority where they can change any coin.... what coin did they change and does that mean the 'previous version' can't be made this year?? or do they just give 30 days notice and change it back?
SHOULD MAKE A BIG EXPLOSION IN THE COIN MARKET.
Camelot
<< <i>What ever happened to this? Will there be a Palladium coin? >>
Great thread!
Thanks for the resuscitation.
No one ever asked MrEureka why he believes paladium is undervalued. It is quite
scarce in comparison to much more valuable metals but there are quite few specific
uses. In addition to being rare it is being consumed so if specific uses develop in the
future it could become quite valuable simply on the basis of being rare.
It's great they are looking at the counterfeiting problem. There are existing laws
which can be enforced most probably but if it takes this then fine. I might be con-
cerned with driving these operations underground. While the quantity would de-
crease the quality might soar.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
there could be a big stink over it.
Camelot
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry