Making Change
Roland Piquepaille writes "There are mostly four kinds of coins in circulation in the U.S: 1 cent, 5 cents, 10 cents, and 25 cents. But is it the most efficient way to give back change? This Science News article says that a computer scientist has found an answer. "For the current four-denomination system, [Jeffrey Shallit of the University of Waterloo] found that, on average, a change-maker must return 4.70 coins with every transaction. He discovered two sets of four denominations that minimize the transaction cost. The combination of 1 cent, 5 cents, 18 cents, and 25 cents requires only 3.89 coins in change per transaction, as does the combination of 1 cent, 5 cents, 18 cents, and 29 cents." He also found that change could be done more efficiently in Canada with the introduction of an 83-cent coin and in Europe with the addition of a 1.33- or 1.37-Euro coin. Check this column for more details and references." The paper (postscript) is online.
I think the advantage to having a 10-cent piece is that it makes the math easy. Let's face it; can you imagine the average cashier at WalMart giving back 98 cents change with an 18-cent coin?
Swannie
:q!
Are you kidding me?!
... *pause* .... and just stare blankly at the change drawer.
Have you ever gotten a bill for dinner for say $12.50 and you give the cashier $15 saying the tip is included?
You would think 15.00 - 12.50 is doable right?
HELL NO! The cashier pulls out a calculator to do the math so she can write it in for the waiter's tips!!!
If people can't add things like this 18cent coins are out of the question.
Although I would like to hear a cashier go,
"That makes $0.88 change sir." Pick out two quarters then,
"Engineers do the work of man, Physicists do the work of God"
Why not just get rid of silly prices like 99.99 and 4.37 and 1.49. ?
Why not round prices to dimes ? Or even quarters ?
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
I was at a conveinece store yesterday. The price came to $1.37. I tendered $2.12. The cashier's head almost exploded.
So- you have 7 18-cent coins, Susie gives you 13, and you give Bobbie 3. How many nickels must Daddy give you for your 18-cent coins...?
Then, you get on a train in Boston traveling east at 300 MPH. In 30 minutes, will you really care about how many 18-cent coins you're carrying?
Whew! This water sure is cold!
More proof of the ungoing schism between science and common sense.
Me, I'm on the side of science.
Don't y'all remember the SchoolHouse Rock about counting by 18?
. . .
*taps foot*
Eighteen is a magic number.
Yes it is, it's a magic number.
Somewhere in the ancient, mystic eighteenity
You get eighteen as a magic number.
The past and the present and the future,
Faith and hope and charity,
The heart and the brain and the body
Give you eighteen.
That's a magic number.
18, 36, 54 . .
72, 90, 108 . .
126, 144, 162 . .
180.
This approach simplifies all transactions to one-coin change. Some people might argue that this is just too many coins to keep track of, but since no one keeps track of their change anyway, it wouldn't matter. It's easier to use the new change to pay as well: Instead of $0.67 being 2 quarters, a dime, a nickel, and 2 pennies, it can be paid in one coin. Or, you could use a 50-cent and a 17-cent piece. Or two 27s and a 13! The possibilities are endlessly easy!
Some people say that it's a problem to differentiate the 99 different coins (95 new coins) by sight. There's a simple answer to this -- each coin would have a number of sides based on its amount. A 4-cent coin is a square, an 8-cent is an octogon, and so forth. So, remember, don't give them three quarters -- just reach into your pocket, feel for the coin with 75 sides, and hand it over.
Oh, and if you can't tell a 99-sided coin from a 97-sided coin by sight, perhaps you should stick to smaller denominations.
The new two-cent coins are easy to lose, so be careful.
/syle
Why did we fight against the Imperial System ?
:
easy, look
Measures of length
After 1959, the U.S. and the British inch were defined identically for scientific work and were identical in commercial usage (however, the U.S. retained the slightly different survey inch for specialized surveying purposes). A similar situation existed for the U.S. and the British mass unit pound, and many relationships, such as 12 inches = 1 foot, 3 feet = 1 yard, and 1760 yards = 1 international mile, were the same in both countries; but there were some very important differences.
Measures of volume
In the first place, the U.S. customary bushel and the U.S. gallon, and their subdivisions differed from the corresponding British Imperial units. Also the British ton is 2240 pounds, whereas the ton generally used in the United States is the short ton of 2000 pounds. The American colonists adopted the English wine gallon of 231 cubic inches. The English of that period used this wine gallon and they also had another gallon, the ale gallon of 282 cubic inches. In 1824, the British abandoned these two gallons when they adopted the British Imperial gallon, which they defined as the volume of 10 pounds of water, at a temperature of 62F, which, by calculation, is equivalent to 277.42 cubic inches. At the same time, they redefined the bushel as 8 gallons.
In the customary British system the units of dry measure are the same as those of liquid measure. In the United States these two are not the same, the gallon and its subdivisions are used in the measurement of liquids; the bushel, with its subdivisions, is used in the measurement of certain dry commodities. The U.S. gallon is divided into four liquid quarts and the U.S. bushel into 32 dry quarts. All the units of capacity or volume mentioned thus far are larger in the customary British system than in the U.S. system. But the British fluid ounce is smaller than the U.S. fluid ounce, because the British quart is divided into 40 fluid ounces whereas the U.S. quart is divided into 32 fluid ounces.
From this we see that in the customary British system an avoirdupois ounce of water at 62F has a volume of one fluid ounce, because 10 pounds is equivalent to 160 avoirdupois ounces, and 1 gallon is equivalent to 4 quarts, or 160 fluid ounces. This convenient relation does not exist in the U.S. system because a U.S. gallon of water at 62F weighs about 8 1/3 pounds, or 133 1/3 avoirdupois ounces, and the U.S. gallon is equivalent to 4 x 32, or 128 fluid ounces.
1 U.S. fluid ounce = 1.041 British fluid ounces
1 British fluid ounce = 0.961 U.S. fluid ounce
1 U.S. gallon = 0.833 British Imperial gallon
1 British Imperial gallon = 1.201 U.S. gallons
Measures of weight and mass
Among other differences between the customary British and the United States measurement systems, we should note that they abolished the use of the troy pound in England January 6, 1879, they retained only the troy ounce and its subdivisions, whereas the troy pound is still legal in the United States, although it is not now greatly used. We can mention again the common use, for body weight, in England of the stone of 14 pounds, this being a unit now unused in the United States, although its influence was shown in the practice until World War II of selling flour by the barrel of 196 pounds (14 stone). In the apothecary system of liquid measure the British add a unit, the fluid scruple, equal to one third of a fluid drachm (spelled dram in the United States) between their minim and their fluid drachm.
In Great Britain, the yard, the avoirdupois pound, the troy pound, and the apothecaries pound are identical with the units of the same names used in the United States. The tables of British linear measure, troy mass, and apothecaries mass are the same as the corresponding United States tables, except for the British spelling "drachm" in the table of apothecaries mass. The table of British avoirdupois mass is the same as the United States table up to 1
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
Engineers also speak PDE, only in a different dialect.
Cecil has the right answer instead of this complete conjecture.
This article is a complete waste of time. This might be a fun paper for a discussion about coinage, but it fails horribly when taken as practical advice.
e ws_and_views/straight_dope.html)
e ws_and_views/straight_dope.html)
The US does not need another coin. Indeed, the *opposite* is true. If you get rid of the penny, you can increase efficiency tremendously, to only 2.75 coins per transaction, and a whopping 45% of transactions would require 2 or fewer coins!
Many people oppose the elimination of the penny, but bear with me for a moment. Consider the following issues:
- Pennies cannot be used in vending machines, and therefore are not as "spendable" as all the other coins.
- Prices will not rise as people think they will; they will fall instead! Everything that is priced at $n.99 will now be $n.95 instead (marketers HATE to price in round dollars because it makes their prices look higher). All other numbers will be rounded to the nearest $n.n5.
- The US government makes 12 billion pennies at a cost of $100 million each year (http://www.retirethepenny.org/), which could be put to better use than filling up my coin jar.
- Half of these pennies will disappear from circulation within a year! (http://www.shepherd-express.com/shepherd/19/41/n
- Counting out pennies costs the economy an estimated $20 billion in productivity annually (http://www.retirethepenny.org/)
- The U.S. Mint loses $8 million a year manufacturing pennies. (http://www.shepherd-express.com/shepherd/19/41/n
Think about it - do you *really* want another coin in your pocket? Thank God that politicians don't listen to us all the time!
-Mark