I can't believe we're actually having this conversation, but here we are. I mentioned the wacky notion of minting Trillion Dollar coins in a Bonus Bananas late last year, but now the idea is gaining steam as a quick fix for the debt ceiling fight. I'm being serious here; people I actually follow and respect are talking like this is a possibility.
The whole thing is a loophole inside a loophole inside a loophole of legality. Since the Constitution regulates all paper money, and gold, silver, and copper coinage, some enterprising Keynesian must have blurted out, "They didn't say anything about platinum!", because that appears to be the plan. Ship a shitload of platinum to the US Mint, have it pressed into $1,000,000,000,000.00 coins, and then deposit those with the Fed to settle our various bar tabs. So why platinum? Why not tin? And why stop at a Trillion? Why not make Hundred Trillion Dollar coins and really kick the can down the road?
But none of those questions are important today, and you don't have any say in whether it happens or not anyway. But there is one thing they can't do without you - decide whose face goes on the Trillion Dollar Coin. That's right, kids. That has to be put out to a vote.
The more difficult part comes sometime after the decision is made to coin the platinum and before the Mint gets to work in sculpting the pieces.
At that point, the American people must decide whose face will adorn the trillion dollar trinket. The process to determine the “specs” of the coin, U.S. Mint Public Affairs Specialist Genevieve Billia warns, must be “determined by legislation,” creating the potential for another congressional impasse.
According to the US Mint, the only hard and fast rule (aside from the voting requirement) is that the person pictured on the coin must be deceased. I'm guessing that's so you don't end up with a Jerry Sandusky on something people are going to be carrying around for the next hundred or so years. Dead guys are easier to vet and don't decide to go off the rails in their autumn years.
While I think John Maynard Keynes would be the obvious choice, I'd give serious consideration to Nelson Aldrich, without whom the Federal Reserve system wouldn't exist. Or maybe Paul Warburg, JP Morgan, or John D. Rockefeller; all equally complicit in the creation of the beast. I'd give Woodrow Wilson a pass on this dubious distinction because at least he had the decency to apologize for signing the Federal Reserve Act into law - an act he considered the most shameful of his presidency (and that bar is set pretty high - Wilson had some doozies).
But what say you, WSO? Whose visage should grace our newest denomination of coinage? Whose face would most piss off the international schmucks that'll be on the receiving end of these subway tokens? Might as well get a little mileage out of 'em. Imagine the look on Hu Jintao's face if he had to look down in his hand and see old "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell smiling back at him.
Eddie, had to ask.
What do you think about a former enlisted grunt who has actually been in combat becoming Sec Def?
Do you think all the former officers in the Senate are secretly conspiring to never let this happen?
Off topic, but it has to be a bitter pill for them to swallow. Because everyone knows the measure of a man is whether or not he's passed fork and knife school.
FDR: his entitlement programs are the cause of the bulk of our spending, so it seems fitting to me.
Boom. And his war on the gold standard sent inflation parabolic. I've got an interesting chart on that for this Friday's Bonus Bananas. Like, total hockey stick, despite being completely flat from the founding of the US through the Civil War and World War I. It's brutal.
Christopher Hitchens. Not because he'd want anything to do with raising the debt ceiling by another trillion dollars, but because he was the man. How badass would that be?
Also, the fact that we're down to debating whether or not we can mint a trillion dollar coin is completely insane.
That said, we've already passed the bills, so not paying for what we've already passed seems a bit silly. What I'd love to see going forward is the following:
--Raise the debt ceiling, pay for what we already owe --THEN, refuse to pass another continuing resolution and pass an actual budget. Shut down the government if necessary, but pass an actual budget based upon 2007 baselines (the continuing resolutions that have been passed for the last three years have the Stimulus baked in, as I understand it)
This is essentially what happened in the 1990s. We got spending under control without risking the credit rating of the US.
The fact that we are actually talking about this means we are already screwed really. A trillion dollar coin? Are you kidding me? I know it sounds strange, but, as TheKing said above, pass a god damn budget. Just the fact that we haven't done that for three years is depressing and should cost every single politician down there their jobs. Then they have the balls to pass a pay increase for themselves. It disgusts me. Now is the time to bring this madness to an end.
That's such a huge part of the problem. Because we keep going with CRs, we end up baking in much higher levels of spending than we saw historically. I'm not one to call for draconian cuts that crush the less well-off, but I'd like to see a legitimate budget with cuts all around get passed. The GOP would look a lot more noble if they did that instead of this brinksmanship garbage. Not to mention, them doing this sets such a completely insane precedent going forward.
Wasn't there an entire Simpsons episode dedicated to this? If I recall correctly, Fidel Castro is just going to steal it anyway.
I don't think any of the guys you mentioned would have gone through with that so Big Ben gets the nod imo.
Henry Wallace
Oh, the irony.
You guys beat me to it, but FDR would just be straight up perfect.
Michael Jackson
how about every politician that has ever voted for more spending/higher taxes/entitlement programs... did i mention more spending?
Can't take full credit for this one as a friend of mine posted it to Facebook, but I thought it was pure gold:
John Boehner
scratch that every political ever....that should fit on a 1 trillion dollar coin, juts make it big enough hell make it out of tin and fool the public, thats what they do anyways
Stephen Colbert had a good idea on his show last night.
It was the Charmin Bear, holding a bunch of toilet paper.
"Because to pull an idea like this that far out of your ass, you will need something extra soft"
Agreed.
The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive
Dagobert Duck
Paul Krugman for being a moron
A map of Jekyll Island.
Al Capone
Patrick Bateman
"don't just stare at it Sabrina, Eat it"
Just in case you think this isn't for real, go to Twitter and look up the hashtag #MintTheCoin and check out who's talking about it. I can't believe we're really here.
I had to check my calendar to see it wasn't the first of April..
Only option on a $1,000,000,000,000 coin is the Troll face.
E pluribus Umad?
This is great. Congratulations, that is an excellent first post. I vote for this, or FDR.
To you econ guys that know a hell of a lot more than me: I've read a few articles about this in the past few days on Zite. Many of the articles cite arguments by proponents of the coin, saying this won't cause hyperinflation because our currency is not based on the gold standard. This makes me giggle in disbelief. To me is seems to go against basic macroeconomic concepts. Perhaps my problem is that basic economic concepts pretty much sum-up my scope of knowledge in this area. These proponents would tell me I simply do not know how the US Treasury works, almost verbatim from a couple articles.
What are your thoughts? Does this coin really go against basic economic concepts? Am I a fuck-ass? Are they fuck-asses?
Magical "this time it's different" thinking from people who don't understand how fiat currency works.
Entitlement programs are a cancer. We should continue to spend and cut taxes until this country breaks in half and then we can just destroy the entitlements and screw people over. I pay into SSI with zero hopes of seeing my money back.
You are entitled to live and die, nothing else. This idea that you have the right to take something from someone else because you deem them to have too much is parasitic and destructive.
This reminds me of Zimbabwe and their 1 trillion dollar bill . Smh. Is this the best they can come up with . How about a trillion dollar stimulus just for jobs
Florence Owens Thompson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Owens_Thompson
The fact that the President is considering this instead of cutting entitlements is disgusting. He got increased takes on the rich, increased revenue, and now is time to cut spending.
To be fair the President does not support this. It started as a White House petition on their website with barely 3000 signatures. Now some liberal politicians and pundits support it. Is he intransigent of spending cuts? Yeah probably. but if he won't even consider the 14th Amendment gimmick then why would he support this, which is a hell of a lot more risky?
Johnny Appleseed
without him there would be no apples.
500 Bananas.
Bernie Madoff. Do it.
its fitting to put the face of that socialist obama on the coin. hes the one spending
Charles Ponzi
Chuck Norris
The Troll face and then send a few to China while you're at it.
Kim Kardashian. The coin will epitomize inflation and reckless spending.
big baby ben rappelling from a helicopter
No face, just a giant middle finger.
How much would it suck if you had a hole in your pocket, and your trillion dollars fell in the sewer?
It's already there.
Boom.
Sed corrupti ut eveniet. Tempora libero corrupti ut earum ducimus odio. Maxime ut beatae vel debitis iste doloremque. Placeat quidem et expedita. Aut vel sit quis sunt voluptas.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Itaque sit ab consequatur et et. Repudiandae recusandae maxime dolorum architecto vitae rerum saepe. Itaque ut aut ipsa velit excepturi corrupti ea sed.
Reiciendis cum maiores sit molestiae consequatur quia dolorem. Ut cupiditate esse ut illum officiis rem. A atque quis dolores cupiditate dolores nobis est. Rerum unde tempore consectetur sequi repudiandae quibusdam.
Modi quisquam sunt consequatur pariatur iusto. Voluptas enim facere ea consequatur quae vel.
Ut ea nam dolores consequuntur similique voluptas rerum. Explicabo non assumenda animi assumenda quis dolore. Aut alias aspernatur similique quidem ullam assumenda. Culpa sit maxime et est neque voluptatem aliquid. Sit dolor et ab ut.
Fugit quia rerum similique suscipit minus est odit. Et laboriosam tempora corporis laborum ex exercitationem a.