2 of 23

Yes

Write now Article Tools

A penny costs more than a penny. That doesn't sound right, so let me rephrase. At this point, because of the cost of metals and other factors, it costs more than 0.01 to produce a penny.

I found this out a while ago, when I logged onto my computer and clicked on an article by USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/money /2006-05-09-penny-usat_x.htm). In case you do not want to read the article, here is an important quote from it: "The Mint estimates it will cost 1.23 cents per penny and 5.73 cents per nickel this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. The cost of producing a penny has risen 27% in the last year, while nickel manufacturing costs have risen 19%."

I was pretty shocked by this concept. I already held the position that the Government is incredibly efficient at wasting our money, but what better proof is there than this? On what grounds should the penny stay in circulation when it costs taxpayers more money than it will buy? I don't think nostalgia, or anything else for that matter is a good enough reason to save the penny.

A common objection is that you lose money by the money being rounded up. Well, that is annoying. However, most places now take credit cards and debit cards. If you are only using cash, then perhaps this is the time to change. The point is, with electronic payment, there is no need for any rounding. If you still choose to pay with cash, that is your right, but I don't want my taxes going to produce coins that cost more than their face value, just so you don't lose 2 cents by refusing to use a debit card.

Yes, the penny is iconic. Yes, I love the penny. Yes, I am a penny-pincher. But no, there is no good reason to keep the penny. And Government, while your at it, why not make the nickel smaller, in order to save on production costs.

Learn more about this author, Brian S. James.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should we eliminate the penny??
We want to hear your view. Write now!