Royal Canadian Mint silver miscalculations

Well, when you produce loads of collectors' Superman and Bugs Bunny pseudo-coins just for a quick profit, you may hurt your bottom line in the end if the price of silver doesn't go according to plans...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/royal-canadian-mint-silver-superman-numismatics-1.4119986

I am wondering how much the Mint pays for the rights to reproduce those characters? It must be quite expensive and, unlike the coins, non-refundable. This isn't mentioned in the column.

From the Comments section:

"It is so embarrassing to live in a country that can't think of anything more worthy to commemorate than cartoon and movie characters. Perhaps whoever is coming up with these ideas should ask the rest of us what we think before wasting money on this puerile nonsense. What exactly does the gingerbread man have to do with Canada?" (Peggy Heath)

"Reading up on this - ALL Canadian coins produced by the mint are legal tender in Canada, and struck under the authority of the Currency Act, which regulates Canadian money.
However, the act does not define the specifications of circulating and non-circulating legal tender coins, which is covered under the Mint Act." (Paul Underhill)

"How do you lose money when you're making the money? Only in Canada!" (Walter J Sommer)

"Who was the brains behind this idea? That person must be receiving a big bonus for such a brilliant idea." (Colin Fidor)

"Lesson learned here, don't attach a currency value to novelty/cartoon coinage. Serious coin collectors are 'long haul' collectors focusing on history and legacy rather than what's popular on TV. The Canadian Mint should get out of the business of novelty coinage and stick with what it knows best, ancestral coinage." (John Colford)

Next year will be the twentieth anniversary of one of the most idiotic mint decision in history. The RCM was so eager to make a profit on its own anniversary that they celebrated their 90th anniversary (1908-1998) and then passed over their centennial in 2008.

I hope that all those mints producing irrelevant commemoratives will have the same fate

It's amazing how many people have been sucked into this Black Hole. I have had many conversations with friends and acquaintances about these "objects", particularly with grandparents "investing" in their children's children.

I always get that "glassy eyed" look when I tell them the grandchildren of their grandchild's grandchildren "may" realize a profit.

I know people who also faceplanted into that pit.

I do have a few RCM coins, but they're for me to enjoy not as an investment. A couple were even obtained below the rock bottom melt value we had.

You wouldn't believe the emails I get from them. About 90% of them have the subject line "A MINT FIRST!", it's a running joke in my household, we have bets out for how long they can do that.

Not to mention the embarrassing Canada 150 "series".

Citeer: "Peter M. Graham"​It's amazing how many people have been sucked into this Black Hole. I have had many conversations with friends and acquaintances about these "objects", particularly with grandparents "investing" in their children's children.
​
​I always get that "glassy eyed" look when I tell them the grandchildren of their grandchild's grandchildren "may" realize a profit.

​Did you notice that our Etobicoke Coin Club member, Henry Neuheis was quoted in the article!

Take the 1976 nickel proof-like dollar, encapsulated with case (or "clam"). It currently sells for about $4─$7. I don't know how much the Mint was selling them for back in 1976, but there's no way anyone is making a profit on these four decades later.

According to the Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator, $100 in 1976 would be equivalent to $425 in 2017. In other words, you have not made a penny on that investment (if that's why you bought the coin in 1976), but actually lost money (whatever the price of this item was in 1976 ─ definitely more than a dollar). It would have been much better to deposit a dollar in the bank (i.e. much less than the price of those collector's dollars) and let the magic of composite interests work for you...

So, I repeat my call for Numista to create a category inside each country for "non-circulating" coins. In this way, Numista will be educating the public about what coins are. In addition, those who collect only (or mostly) circulating coins will not have to browse through page after page of that trash deluxe.

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​Take the 1976 nickel proof-like dollar, encapsulated with case (or "clam"). It currently sells for about $4─$7. I don't know how much the Mint was selling them for back in 1976, but there's no way anyone is making a profit on these four decades later.
​
​According to the Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator, $100 in 1976 would be equivalent to $425 in 2017. In other words, you have not made a penny on that investment (if that's why you bought the coin in 1976), but actually lost money (whatever the price of this item was in 1976 ─ definitely more than a dollar). It would have been much better to deposit a dollar in the bank (i.e. much less than the price of those collector's dollars) and let the magic of composite interests work for you...
​
​So, I repeat my call for Numista to create a category inside each country for "non-circulating" coins. In this way, Numista will be educating the public about what coins are. In addition, those who collect only (or mostly) circulating coins will not have to browse through page after page of that trash deluxe.

​You don't need to - you can uncheck the 'commemorative' or 'non circulating' option during the search:

Citeer: "druzhynets"​
​​You don't need to - you can uncheck the 'commemorative' or 'non circulating' option during the search:
​

​Thanks, druzhynets, for this useful advice, but I usually browse the catalogue.

Is there a way to remove the non-circulating coins from view when I enter my modern (Elizabeth II) coins in the catalogue? This is something I have yet to do.

EDIT: Ah! OK! I went to Advanced Search, unchecked non-circulating coins, and then browsed. Note that, at 20 items per page, one goes from 81 to 13 pages when you do this!! What an amazing quantity of junk the RCM has put on the market!! 67-68 pages X 20 = about 1350 pseudo-coins!!!

I'd say about 10% of the trash deluxe produced by RCM is decent in my book. None of the coloured, 3D, etc. junk falls in there though. I really liked the Exploring Canada series (2014-2015 $15) as well as the first few $20-for-$20 (the first 4 actually plus may be 2 more from the rest). But even some coins they were selling at face value before are now much more expensive as they often charge 2X plus shipping.

Citeer: "ashlobo"​​​Did you notice that our Etobicoke Coin Club member, Henry Neuheis was quoted in the article!

​Not only quoted, he's in the video as well.

I'm so glad to see the pushback against this cynical exploitation of one of the most visible representations of a country to the outside world. I can almost understand a war torn, bankrupt country like Liberia jumping at the chance to sell a part of it's national soul for a fast buck, but Canada.... of all countries, why Canada? The once proud RCM is today the numismatic equivalent of the Sham-wow guy.

I used to love collecting Canadian coins as part of a larger British Empire collection. The early issues are of a great quality and featured some inspired, classic designs. I gave up in disgust some years ago due to the tasteless activities of the mint. Even if they fired all the Billy Mays types tomorrow and returned the mint to adult management I think the damage done to their prestige is permanent. Whenever I think of Canadian coins I think of absurd glow in the dark novelties, not those wonderful turn of the 20th century gems.

Their base greed has really killed the proverbial goose. Sorry to our cherished Canadian friends (except Coinsoldier - you can still bugger off), it couldn't have happened to a people less deserving.

The RCM actually killed a good joke:

─ I got a multicoloured coin in my change yesterday.
─ A multicoloured coin? That must be a pigment of your imagination!

More seriously, it's quite ironic that even the banks won't accept those non-circulating coins, even at face value!

Still, I am happy that the line between circulating and non-circulating is sharp. So, there is the "sober" circulating coinage struck under the authority of the Currency Act, and there is the for-profit, Mickey Mouse coinage struck under the Mint Act. Note that the Mint was legally required to strike pennies until 2012, even at a loss (or at least at no real profit if the government/people paid the Mint to strike them), and that the decision to kill the penny resided with the federal government, not the Mint.

So far as that line between the two types of coins is maintained, I will be happy to complete my circulating set, but indeed the whole non-circulating scheme is quite embarrassing. I wonder whether the queen knows she is paired with Superman and Bugs Bunny on our coinage?

I'm the referee for Tuvalu, Palau and most of those garbage modern silver countries only because of my will to keep the catalog complete and up-to-date. I don't like this kind of coinage, but still some small poor island countries need some money, that's pretty understandable. Yet Canada, oh my God! Such a fantastic country minting such trash... Mamma mia! I can't stand even thinking about it... Superman, Star Wars... What a joke!

Citeer: "smoked_caramel"...trash deluxe produced by RCM ...

​I like this nickname as much as I hate what RCM does. I agree that only about 10% (and even less during last 3-4 years) can be somehow considered as "non-circulating commemorative coins" while the rest should be designated as "numismatic souvenirs" and should never be called "coins" at all. In case of RCM, it would (probably) be quite difficult to draw the line between these two categories, but why don't we try?

What I (seriously!) suggest is:
a) here at Numista we can collectively agree on the term to be used for such coin-like objects (unless such term already exists and I am not aware of this) - whether it is "trash deluxe", "numismatic souvenirs" or whatever seems to be appropriate, and
b) start marking with this term all such issues, starting with RCM trash and than extending the same terminology to other coin-like issues of other countries.

If we, as a numismatic society, won't do it - nobody else will.

Citeer: "glykan"​

Citeer: "smoked_caramel"...trash deluxe produced by RCM ...

​​I like this nickname as much as I hate what RCM does. I agree that only about 10% (and even less during last 3-4 years) can be somehow considered as "non-circulating commemorative coins" while the rest should be designated as "numismatic souvenirs" and should never be called "coins" at all. In case of RCM, it would (probably) be quite difficult to draw the line between these two categories, but why don't we try?
​
​What I (seriously!) suggest is:
​a) here at Numista we can collectively agree on the term to be used for such coin-like objects (unless such term already exists and I am not aware of this) - whether it is "trash deluxe", "numismatic souvenirs" or whatever seems to be appropriate, and
​b) start marking with this term all such issues, starting with RCM trash and than extending the same terminology to other coin-like issues of other countries.
​
​If we, as a numismatic society, won't do it - nobody else will.
​

​I'm happy some of you folks like my "trash deluxe".

However, though I obviously agree with glykan about those pseudo-coins, we're likely to insult some Numista members if we actually use such terms as "trash" or "souvenirs" in the catalogue. I would use "non-circulating" and spell it out for every such coin on their catalogue page (which is not currently done). Perhaps what we need is a post on "What is a coin?" and describe the different categories of objects that can be considered numismatic: coins, non-circulating coins, trade tokens, etc.

As I've said in other posts, the words "coin" and "token" on their own mean little to nothing. When a "token" is from a belly-dancer's dress, we're not at all talking about the same thing as a "token" used as currency! Note also that trade "tokens" have a much much greater numismatic value than non-circulating "coins". The 1830s imitation Tiffin tokens were a profit-making scam, but those tokens did circulate extensively until the banks refused them. So, they are part of the economic history of Canada. Mickey Mouse and Bee Gees coins are meant to be displayed above someones dresser or fireplace. Their only role in the economic history of Canada is for the RCM to make a profit.

Sorry ─ I studied the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, so I'm aware of those linguistic categorization problems!

*** EDIT *** EDIT *** EDIT ***

I searched the "A" countries in the catalogue and compared total coin numbers with total minus non-circulating. These figures are, of course, not statistics, but they are a very good indicator of the situation. Note that if we did the same search by excluding pre-1970 coins, some countries would look much worse (Austria, for example). I didn't include countries such as the Azores which have stopped coining in ... 1910.

→ Afghanistan 270 / 238 (that's 270 total coins vs. 238 circulating, so 32 non-circulating)
→ Albania 106 / 69
→ Algeria 112 / 104
→ American Samoa 11 / 0
→ Andorra 191 / 10
→ Angola 115 / 107
→ Anguilla 17 / 6
→ Argentina 198 / 144
→ Aruba 60 / 11
→ Ascension 63 / 0
→ Australia 1238 / 170
→ Austria 430 / 97
→ Azerbaijan 29 / 15
...
→ Canada 1603 / 254

Citeer: "druzhynets"​I'm the referee for Tuvalu, Palau and most of those garbage modern silver countries only because of my will to keep the catalog complete and up-to-date. I don't like this kind of coinage, but still some small poor island countries need some money, that's pretty understandable. Yet Canada, oh my God! Such a fantastic country minting such trash... Mamma mia! I can't stand even thinking about it... Superman, Star Wars... What a joke!

​I am referee for Niue, and I do it for the same reason, just to improve the catalog. I like some of the Canadian commemoratives, like the ones HERE, but it's not like I'm going to pay that much over what it is worth. If I had to choose, I would rather collect the "free" US state and state park quarters than any countries modern commems.

Some more countries:

→ British Virgin Islands 299 / 0 (they use the US dollar!)
→ Gibraltar 541 / 135
→ Isle of Man 800 / 194
→ Niue 439 / 0 (they use the NZ dollar!)
→ Palau 303 / 0 (they use the US dollar!)
→ Tuvalu 259 / 14

Sad, though I thank druzhynets and nthn for their labor of love.

Citeer: "Camerinvs"However, though I obviously agree with glykan about those pseudo-coins, we're likely to insult some Numista members if we actually use such terms as "trash" or "souvenirs" in the catalogue. I would use "non-circulating" and spell it out for every such coin on their catalogue page (which is not currently done). Perhaps what we need is a post on "What is a coin?" and describe the different categories of objects that can be considered numismatic: coins, non-circulating coins, trade tokens, etc.

​I agree that the name shouldn't be offensive or derogatory. At the same time I think it's not enough to name all those Mickey-mouse-type of coins "non-circulating" - it would be way too easy to mix it up with "non-circulating coins". I actually suggest to put them in a separate category (with any kind of euphemism but definitely not calling them "coins"), together with the "Lord of the Rings" coins, Niue, Palau and - you name them...

I think the discussion topic on something like "What is a coin and what is not" - in Numismatic Questions section of the Forum - would be a good start. At least we can try to agree on some terminology and what belongs where.

P.S. No offense to the lovers of such "coin souvenirs" though - I myself have a number of them and though I don't buy them any longer, I am enjoying many of them and keeping them as a part of my collection.

If that's the discussion then which of these are commemorative coins and which aren't? Is a coin with Mickey Mouse on it a commemorative? What about the birth stone ones with actual stones in them? What about the wartime series?

Maybe that's the designation we need rather than "circulating" and "non-circulating"?

Citeer: "MonaSeaclaid"​If that's the discussion then which of these are commemorative coins and which aren't? Is a coin with Mickey Mouse on it a commemorative? What about the birth stone ones with actual stones in them? What about the wartime series?
​
​Maybe that's the designation we need rather than "circulating" and "non-circulating"?

I can think of at least five categories:
► circulating regular (e.g. 1¢ 1858-1859; 1876-1966, 1968-1991, 1993-2001, 2003-2012)
► circulating commemorative (e.g. 1¢ 1967, 1992, 2002, millenium 25¢ series)
► non-circulating regular (e.g. UK gold pound Elizabeth II; any Canadian?)
► non-circulating commemorative (Mint 90th 1998)
► non-circulating thematic (e.g. cartoons, birth stones)

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​

Citeer: "MonaSeaclaid"​If that's the discussion then which of these are commemorative coins and which aren't? Is a coin with Mickey Mouse on it a commemorative? What about the birth stone ones with actual stones in them? What about the wartime series?
​​
​​Maybe that's the designation we need rather than "circulating" and "non-circulating"?

​I can think of at least five categories:
​► circulating regular (e.g. 1¢ 1858-1859; 1876-1966, 1968-1991, 1993-2001, 2003-2012)
​► circulating commemorative (e.g. 1¢ 1967, 1992, 2002, millenium 25¢ series)
​► non-circulating regular (e.g. UK gold pound Elizabeth II; any Canadian?)
​► non-circulating commemorative (Mint 90th 1998)
​► non-circulating thematic (e.g. cartoons, birth stones)

​All sounds quite a bit confusing really. I think most people either collect "circulating" (including circulating commemoratives) and non-circulating (everything else).
I understand that especially for the newbie collector, its important they understand the difference between the two. But after that, if someone elects to buy non-circulating coins, we should leave it to his/her best judgement what they like and can afford.

In my experience as someone who does dabble in NCLT coins, I just pick a series or a one off which appeals to me. As long as someone goes with eyes wide open that the coin doesn't circulate, I don't see the point of distinguishing a mickey-mouse/star wars coin from a 150th Anniversary of Canada theme

Oh ─ I agree. Perhaps what is unclear in the catalogue descriptions is that the word "commemorative" is used for all, circulating and non. So, if you don't know Canadian coins very well and look, for example, at the list for the $2 coins, you might not be sure at all whether a coin is or isn't circulating.

So, given that almost all non-circulating coins are either thematic or commemorative, I would just use "non-circulating" in the description for those who browse the list. Currently, for many coins, you can find out whether they are non-circulating only when you look at the metallic composition. The fact that a coin is circulating or not is perhaps the most important individual characteristic, so it should be clear from the description. It is not enough, IMHO, that you can filter them out through advanced search.

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​Oh ─ I agree. Perhaps what is unclear in the catalogue descriptions is that the word "commemorative" is used for all, circulating and non. So, if you don't know Canadian coins very well and look, for example, at the list for the $2 coins, you might not be sure at all whether a coin is or isn't circulating.
​
​So, given that almost all non-circulating coins are either thematic or commemorative, I would just use "non-circulating" in the description for those who browse the list. Currently, for many coins, you can find out whether they are non-circulating only when you look at the metallic composition. The fact that a coin is circulating or not is perhaps the most important individual characteristic, so it should be clear from the description. It is not enough, IMHO, that you can filter them out through advanced search.

​Yep I do agree with that, I had a tough time deciphering Australia in a similar way until I just decided to see the mint website which has the list of circulating only commemorative coins too.

If we apply the filters in advanced search on Numista's catalogue, it should turn up the same thing, but I question the integrity because this is being maintained pro-bono and is only as good as the person's knowledge entering the details. So to this extent, I totally agree.

For Canada checking out the metallic composition is not going to help you. Take $1 coins (loonies) for example, they put out a dozen different ones a year for various things. They mainly come in sets but it's not unheard of for a set to be broken up.

Off the top of my head there's a Canada 150, Birthday, Birth Year, Wedding, Winter Holiday (Christmas), and Snow Goose. Out of those only the Snow Goose comes with a quality finish, the others are just BU. So if you got one of those in your change or on its own in a shop you would think it was just -another- Canadian commemorative circulation coin. The metallic composition is the same as any other loonie you'd find that year.

Citeer: "MonaSeaclaid"​For Canada checking out the metallic composition is not going to help you. Take $1 coins (loonies) for example, they put out a dozen different ones a year for various things. They mainly come in sets but it's not unheard of for a set to be broken up.
​
​Off the top of my head there's a Canada 150, Birthday, Birth Year, Wedding, Winter Holiday (Christmas), and Snow Goose. Out of those only the Snow Goose comes with a quality finish, the others are just BU. So if you got one of those in your change or on its own in a shop you would think it was just -another- Canadian commemorative circulation coin. The metallic composition is the same as any other loonie you'd find that year.

​
reminds me of my luck finding this coin

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic47319.html

Citeer: "ashlobo"​​​
​reminds me of my luck finding this coin
​
​https://en.numista.com/forum/topic47319.html

​Wow ─ I wouldn't even have known it's non-circulating, but I would have saved it, of course. I'm wondering whether some 1997 to 2000 caribou 25¢ are found in circulation. None were struck for circulation; in theory they're found only in proof/proof-like condition and in sets.

And what Mona says is exactly right. I don't know the "loonie" and "twonie" series well enough to tell you in all cases whether it is circulating or not.

Maybe they all should be separated as bullion coinage?

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​

Citeer: "ashlobo"​​​
​​reminds me of my luck finding this coin
​​
​​https://en.numista.com/forum/topic47319.html
​
​

​​Wow ─ I wouldn't even have known it's non-circulating, but I would have saved it, of course. I'm wondering whether some 1997 to 2000 caribou 25¢ are found in circulation. None were struck for circulation; in theory they're found only in proof/proof-like condition and in sets.
​
​And what Mona says is exactly right. I don't know the "loonie" and "twonie" series well enough to tell you in all cases whether it is circulating or not.

​Even better, it's not uncommon for Canada to have coloured coins in circulation, so that wouldn't help you either. I believe there are two this year, though I can't be sure. In some cases you even have coloured and uncoloured versions of the same commemorative coin in circulation in the same year.

Also I didn't even know that about the caribou quarter, I knew that 1999 and 2000 probably didn't have them (there are 12-13 circulation commemorative quarters out for each of those years, and there were 14 in 1992. Don't make me count up the numbers after the millenium) but I didn't realise about the other years. I'll have to check my supply to see if I have any. Before now I would have said yes for sure but now I don't know.

Citeer: "druzhynets"​Maybe they all should be separated as bullion coinage?

​Bullion is yet another category and non-circulating nickel coins are not bullion. In addition, the gold and silver thematic coins are not sold as bullion either since their price is fixed by the Mint, not by the market value of those metals, unlike the Maple Leaf series (with a .9999 guarantee of purity inscribed on the coins).

Interestingly, the bullion gold and silver Maple Leafs are not in the catalogue. I suppose they are just metal bars in the shape of coins.

It would be interesting to know how many of us collectors of Canadian coins happen to have some 1997-2000 caribou proof-likes lurking among our regular (circulating) quarters!

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​

Citeer: "druzhynets"​Maybe they all should be separated as bullion coinage?

​​Bullion is yet another category and non-circulating nickel coins are not bullion. In addition, the gold and silver thematic coins are not sold as bullion either since their price is fixed by the Mint, not by the market value of those metals, unlike the Maple Leaf series (with a .9999 guarantee of purity inscribed on the coins).
​
​Interestingly, the bullion gold and silver Maple Leafs are not in the catalogue. I suppose they are just metal bars in the shape of coins.
​
​It would be interesting to know how many of us collectors of Canadian coins happen to have some 1997-2000 caribou proof-likes lurking among our regular (circulating) quarters!

​I dont collect by date, so I've been completely unaware about this. I do coin roll hunting every other week. So something to keep my eye out for!

Citeer: "ashlobo"​
I dont collect by date, so I've been completely unaware about this. I do coin roll hunting every other week. So something to keep my eye out for!

​Keep an eye open also for the 1991, the lowest mintage (459,000) for any year since 1934!

Citeer: "Camerinvs"​

Citeer: "ashlobo"​
​I dont collect by date, so I've been completely unaware about this. I do coin roll hunting every other week. So something to keep my eye out for!
​
​

​​Keep an eye open also for the 1991, the lowest mintage (459,000) for any year since 1934!

​A MINT FIRST!*

*since 1934

Good one, Mona!

For your info, here is what a headache this circulating/non-circulating problem is causing with regard to the 50¢ coins:

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic60085.html

Now I'm curious, are there any other coins out there that are regularly minted "for circulation" but only sold for collectors like the Canadian 50 cent pieces?

Sorry if that's hijacking your thread, say the word and I'll start a new one.

On a side note too I really miss the 50 cent piece, I find it a very attractive coin.

Well, if you hijacked my thread, then I hijacked it my myself just before you! I think what you say is relevant because it proves what you and ashlobo and glykan and others said earlier about the catalogue and how tricky it is to distinguish circulating from non-circulating. Having just looked at the 50¢ series, I now know that the catalogue is not entirely accurate on this issue.

My numismatic joke of the day:

Non-circulating coins are to coins what root beer is to beer.

I revive this older post just to add another piece to the puzzle. Well, it's not really a puzzle since this Toronto Star post shows yet again that "legal tender" doesn't mean a dealer or bank is legally obliged to accept your coin. If it is "non-circulating legal tender" they can turn it down.

The Isle of Man numbers are correct as to their recording. But the copper nickel crowns that were not proof were issued for circulation purposes on the island. Not in great numbers, but then mintages were also extremely low. As time permits they will be corrected to circulating commemoratives. Tower Mint has made no Isle of Man crowns. So I can't speak to their circulation status.

ready...
set...
x b l a m e c a n a d a x

i sort of see and understand everyone's point on this subject matter
it's sort of exciting and sad for me personally as a collector of coins, especially Canadian coins
I just love collecting unwanted, undesired coins for the most part
a bit of silver now i shall collect here and there too i suppose
i personally never really got into it for "the money" or "to make money"
from my observations, i feel a lot of people suffer from "dragon sickness"
i see every and all kinds of big business's taking advantage of peoples weakness to
without getting too far into it...just have a look at what people pay for there cellular phones every month...
or how about cable tv, or internet?
food, gas, utilities, like to heat your home?
car insurance...insurance in general...
the list goes on and on and on...
it's all about someone clamoring for every last dollar and cent that you have
greed killing basically
it's sad too, because for me sometimes i want to think i am just doing something "fun and innocent" like coin collecting...some how it turns into something evil...
for example...i just want a peter rabbit 50p from england...
why?
because, i like coins and i love rabbits...
well...here's the thing...the mint's, the government, the people, know how to take advantage of the soft spots in ones heart, consequently, this may ultimately turn into a profit for them or someone...because it's all about getting the most money.
when at the end of the day, i just want to pay face value for a coin with a bunny rabbit on it cause i think it's cool looking and i like it...but there in lies the real problem...me. i fall for it, i desire it, i want it, i acquire it. (well i have not really gotten it yet actually) BUT! if i want it...i will have to pay like 4$ for it probably because of "what it is" instead of what it actually represents, which is 50p.
i lost all my coins in the hurricane, because hurricanes are dumb
the loss of time has hurt me more than the collection because i spent countless hours, cataloging and sorting and organizing
it takes me a lot longer to do these type of things too because i am in a wheelchair and i have cerebral palsy, but i am high functioning
sometimes i get embarrassed, but as i get older i am not anymore because, i see most people in the world as having some sort of physical or mental disability
and it goes from the "top" down...look at the "leaders" of our countries...look at the citizens, look at all the brainwashed people...
it's dumb!
all i want to do is collect coins and learn about the birds on the coins and stuff like that
but everything always turns to sh!t...
i see a push someday soon for a paperless and coinless monetary system
i also see more people starting to "wake up" to what they value more of in the world
people will have to force themselves to make harder and harder choices
some say, "money is time and time is money"
money is something that "people" invented...
time is not this
i didn't have an electric wheelchair because we did not have enough "time" because of a hurricane coming right at us
we didn't have enough "time" because of some of the choices we made
as a result, we have had to face the consequence of our decisions
and because of that, we then now had to face a result
the result was i needed a new chair because i could not really go anywhere
and if i can't go anywhere, then "real time" will take over
my mom used to say, "nobody is getting out of here alive"
that is true of course
and as for time
even though my nonsensical babble has taken me hours to type and edit
and perhaps only minutes for you to read
i just thought that this topic is so intriguing
i love canada
and i will always love coins from canada
what mints do with coins, silver and gold and precious metals is mostly wrong and causes dragon sickness
but that's just my opinion
i ask myself, what the real question is or what the real problem is...
them or me?

however, i will always blame canada
because i blame stupid, a m e r i c a n s
i blame, the p e o p l e
i blame e v e r y o n e
i blame m y s e l f

"i blame" the list can go on and on
but i am too tired right now and i want a bowl of froot loops and back to bed
but this topic has kept me up since last night
interesting
i love bunnys