r...@lycos.com wrote:
http://m.good.is/post/chipotle-ends-the-penny-before-u-s-mint-does/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
We sometimes get the occasional suggestion over here to ditch the 1 cent
coin, and I must say I am totally against the idea. When we dumped the
old predecimal farthings (1/4 penny) and halfpennies, prices
automatically dropped the fractional component. If you are going to
display prices in centieuro (or centidollars) then you need a coin of
value 1 cent, and resorting to rounding up or down only makes a very
elegant decimal system based on 1/100 slightly less simple. You also
open the door to price creep (yes, they may say they only round down,
but they will end up increasing the displayed price to compensate).
Then, what coins will we drop next ? Will we end up with a small range
of acceptable values for cents, e.g. multiples of 25, and suddenly find
we've transitioned from a decimal based to a fraction based (quarter)
currency ?
Not all proposed changes are necessarily good.
The real problem with the US coinage is too few rather than too many
coin types. You need a 2c and replace the quarter with a 20c and a
50c. By using this approximate binary multiple (each coin is twice the
value of the lower one) you increase the number of coin types, but you
decrease the average number of coins you need to use to make up any
given amount.
As an exercise, take all values from 1 and 99 and sum the number of US
and Euro (*) denominated coins needed to make up each amount. The Euro
denominations produce a smaller number of required coins for most of them.
Have more coin types, and carry around less as a result.
(*) not just Euro - our former punt had identical denominations, as does
the current pound.
--
Tom Wade
tom.w...@tomwade.eu
