It DID affect their fungibility, hence the reason people starting saving the silver coins and spending the others.
Spot price of silver in 1964 was $1.29/oz, and there's 0.18oz of silver in a quarter, so the melt value of the coin at the time ($0.23) was slightly less than the face value. I'm sure the government saw that silver was quickly going to be worth more than the coin itself, hence the reason they ditched the silver minting.
Topic: Why did removing the silver content of coins not affect their fungibility? - page 2. (Read 1708 times)
June 18, 2014, 07:08:00 PM
June 18, 2014, 06:59:01 PM
It seems that during the mid 20th century, many countries stopped putting actual silver into their "silver" coins and replaced it with the relatively worthless cupronickel. The pre-1965 US dime for example, consisted of ninety percent silver and so did the pre-1947 coins of the British pound sterling.
So how and why did this not affect their fungibility? A 1964 US dime and a 1965 US dime would have had the same fiat value but the 1964 dime would have had additional value due to its silver content, no?
It's like if the US Mint suddenly decided produce $100 notes in the form of gold bars, then those bills would be worth much more than other bills right?
So how and why did this not affect their fungibility? A 1964 US dime and a 1965 US dime would have had the same fiat value but the 1964 dime would have had additional value due to its silver content, no?
It's like if the US Mint suddenly decided produce $100 notes in the form of gold bars, then those bills would be worth much more than other bills right?
Jump to: