Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 20, 2021 18:15:22 GMT
<cough> p2pindependentforum.com/thread/18299/abolishing-cash-paymentsWe don't even really NEED all the coin options we currently have... The 1/2p went in the bin in 1984, because it was a piddly useless thing. That's rapidly approaching 40 years ago, less than a decade and a half after it was introduced. Inflation alone means that the 1984 value of 1/2p is now about 1 2/3p (or 1p now is less than 1/3p in 1984). Do we need the 1p? no, but then the US dollar and the Euro still have even less valuable equivalents. EDIT: although I see that many Euro countries have stopped using the 1 and 2 cents, and they may go altogether. Again, since we in the UK are all supposed to be living in the past these days, I can't see it being a popular option here. We had to re-introduce a 1/2p because using 10p instead of a shilling worth 12p would have meant the cost of everything was rounded up, doesn't seem like a lot these days, but a penny was a penny in olden times! There was a previous halfpenny and a farthing 1/4 penny, but inflation did away with them too. I believe florins were mentioned somewhere up the thread, a florin was two shillings and a halfcrown two shillings and sixpence.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Feb 20, 2021 19:39:55 GMT
Yep, they're talking about phasing the € 1c out. Bear in mind, though, that the Euro is used in countries with far lower incomes than the UK... Latvian and Slovak average net monthly incomes are ~€850, Portugal €1,000, Greece €1,100 - so 1c is a much bigger proportion than 1p here, with €2,300. And that's just the countries that use it officially - Kosovo and Montenegro aren't official members, but use it, and are even lower. The yanks? Well, they still have $1 notes, bless 'em... (They got rid of the 1/2c in 1857!) Never underestimate the usefulness of low value coins, or indeed other things that at first seem unlikely to be useful.... I was first given an idea I have used many times since (although I believe it is technically unlawful) by a very old Indian gentleman who's English was about as good as my Urdu. His granddaughter (at a guess) translated. He said there was a very low value Indian coin with a hole in the middle and to buy a washer the same size cost three of these coins, and the government was always puzzled why the coins were so scarce. I took a 2p coin out of my pocket drilled a hole in the middle finished what I was doing, He nodded and we exchanged smiles. I will never know if he just wanted to tell the tale or solve my problem, but I think about him every time I need to use the trick (Not often washers are very cheap, but not always to hand).
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 20, 2021 21:52:27 GMT
10 is most definitely not a magic number. The most "magic" numbers tend to be irrational: Pi, e. Or more esoterically, "i" . Those are numbers which genuinely contain 'magic' in them. Fractions are terribly useful. Digital Computers are fundamentally binary, so base 2 and base 16 are critical. However, there is nothing clever or no good reason for a base 12 currency system when our core number system is base 10. 12 is a useful number because it is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12, lots of options for coins. 10 is only divisible by 1, 2, 5, and 10. but it would be a lot more practical if our common numbering system was 0,1..9AB. It isn't. Its base 10. It would have been even better had humans evolved to have had 8 digits instead of 10, then we would have naturally have created a base 8 number system, which would have had the benefits have been a multiple of a binary base, with benefits alround. But we weren't, and we didn't. Anyway, the point you've made is not a meaningful one. A base 10 number system does not mean we need - or even have - a 1x10 currency unit system. We don't: we have a 1x10^2 in pretty much all decimal based currencies: 100p = £1, 100c = $1, 100c = 1 euro. As you say, that gives lots of options for coins, being divisible by an awful lot more than 1,2,3,4,6, and 12. It seems to work pretty well. I think the US has a quarter, being 25c. We choose to not have. But you could equally well have a 30c/p coin. You don't actually need to have lower denomination coinage to be a factor of the higher level unit. No reason for it to be so. What is useful is being able to carry out currency calculations 'naturally' in the base that is aligned to the universally used number system.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 21, 2021 9:46:27 GMT
12 is a useful number because it is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12, lots of options for coins. 10 is only divisible by 1, 2, 5, and 10. but it would be a lot more practical if our common numbering system was 0,1..9AB. It isn't. Its base 10. It would have been even better had humans evolved to have had 8 digits instead of 10, then we would have naturally have created a base 8 number system, which would have had the benefits have been a multiple of a binary base, with benefits alround. But we weren't, and we didn't. Anyway, the point you've made is not a meaningful one. A base 10 number system does not mean we need - or even have - a 1x10 currency unit system. We don't: we have a 1x10^2 in pretty much all decimal based currencies: 100p = £1, 100c = $1, 100c = 1 euro. As you say, that gives lots of options for coins, being divisible by an awful lot more than 1,2,3,4,6, and 12. It seems to work pretty well. I think the US has a quarter, being 25c. We choose to not have. But you could equally well have a 30c/p coin. You don't actually need to have lower denomination coinage to be a factor of the higher level unit. No reason for it to be so. What is useful is being able to carry out currency calculations 'naturally' in the base that is aligned to the universally used number system. I'm talking about why 12 pence to the shilling was useful in the past, having factors was important so that you could change down your shilling to smaller amounts (when a shilling was a significant sum) without getting a pocketful of pennies. In history the coinage (and all other measures) developed to be convenient to the people who used them and they worked pretty well. Metric works too and in this more logical era it is more logical and easier for school children to learn. But why don't we go the whole hog and go binary to be in step with computers (as you mention)? Or maybe that will be the next logical step. But if base 10 is so great why do we still have 12 months in a year, 7 days in a week, 24 hours in a day, 60 minutes in an hour? And why is the metric version of degrees 400 gons to 360 degrees (this one really confused me in my surveying days)? Let's sort it out guys!
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on Feb 21, 2021 11:00:11 GMT
but it would be a lot more practical if our common numbering system was 0,1..9AB. It isn't. Its base 10. It would have been even better had humans evolved to have had 8 digits instead of 10, then we would have naturally have created a base 8 number system, which would have had the benefits have been a multiple of a binary base, with benefits alround. But we weren't, and we didn't. Anyway, the point you've made is not a meaningful one. A base 10 number system does not mean we need - or even have - a 1x10 currency unit system. We don't: we have a 1x10^2 in pretty much all decimal based currencies: 100p = £1, 100c = $1, 100c = 1 euro. As you say, that gives lots of options for coins, being divisible by an awful lot more than 1,2,3,4,6, and 12. It seems to work pretty well. I think the US has a quarter, being 25c. We choose to not have. But you could equally well have a 30c/p coin. You don't actually need to have lower denomination coinage to be a factor of the higher level unit. No reason for it to be so. What is useful is being able to carry out currency calculations 'naturally' in the base that is aligned to the universally used number system. I'm talking about why 12 pence to the shilling was useful in the past, having factors was important so that you could change down your shilling to smaller amounts (when a shilling was a significant sum) without getting a pocketful of pennies. In history the coinage (and all other measures) developed to be convenient to the people who used them and they worked pretty well. Metric works too and in this more logical era it is more logical and easier for school children to learn. But why don't we go the whole hog and go binary to be in step with computers (as you mention)? Or maybe that will be the next logical step. But if base 10 is so great why do we still have 12 months in a year, 7 days in a week, 24 hours in a day, 60 minutes in an hour? And why is the metric version of degrees 400 gons to 360 degrees (this one really confused me in my surveying days)? Let's sort it out guys! Well months are (loosely) based on the lunar cycle, 28 days, and 7 is a factor of 28. I guess we could have had 14 day weeks. I think the Romans messed about with the months. 13 months of 28 (364 days) might have made more sense but then you'd need the extra day every year somewhere as well as the extra day every 4 years. However you break it down, you can't change the number of days in a year so you couldn't usefully have a metric system. if you were wedded to 10 months, then 36/37 day months could be done, but that wouldn't really improve anything. Earth, moon and sun cycles are pretty fundamental and unalterable. How we count/measure other things not, so I don't really see any equivalence. EDIT: And of course there is the religious side of things for the 7 day week - which came first (the biblical account or the 7-day week) I have no idea...
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,864
Likes: 2,305
|
Post by keitha on Feb 21, 2021 12:07:53 GMT
Giggling at this
Coins i can remember ( pre decimal ), and some of the names may differ around the UK
The Ship halfpenny we used to collect these for church who used the funds for work in an African village Penny Threepenny bit ( aka threepence or thruppenny bit ) wonderful 12 sided coin, brass ( can remember once being given a silver one ) 6d ( the tanner) shilling ( the bob ) 2 shillings ( 2 bob ) 2 & 6 ( half crown, also referred to by market traders as half a dollar )
some of the old terms had a modicum of sense, for example you paid 200 guineas for a horse at auction or via a dealer, the original owner gets £200 and the dealer gets the 200 shillings.
I can remember going with my father to buy some piping he said he wanted 1/2 inch pipe, the guy said " you need 12 MM cos pipe is metric now, how many feet do you want !
and of course we had 2 imperial sizes of spanner AF and Whitworth which were different, Whitworth being larger !
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 12:21:42 GMT
Whitworth was a fantastic Engineer, sorted out industrialisation long before Ford or whoever really started Oldsmobile, (don't believe Wiki on that one it was probably a Mr Smith). He was working prior to 1897 (one of the most critical dates in Engineering history BTW) and he also produced an amazing sniper's rifle with hexagonal bore.
AF of course was merely Across the Flats measurement of a hexagon.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 21, 2021 12:26:01 GMT
I'm talking about why 12 pence to the shilling was useful in the past, having factors was important so that you could change down your shilling to smaller amounts (when a shilling was a significant sum) without getting a pocketful of pennies. If 12d to the shilling was optimal, why were 1/2p and 1/4p required...? With the farthing, your shilling was base 48 - which is near-as-dammit indistinguishable from 50, which is what you'd have the £ divisible into if we got shot of the 1p...
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,864
Likes: 2,305
|
Post by keitha on Feb 21, 2021 12:32:29 GMT
adrianc But the 99P shop would have to rename !
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 21, 2021 12:34:25 GMT
The excellent thread title change didn't go unnoticed by the way, adrianc 😁
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on Feb 21, 2021 12:35:44 GMT
I'm talking about why 12 pence to the shilling was useful in the past, having factors was important so that you could change down your shilling to smaller amounts (when a shilling was a significant sum) without getting a pocketful of pennies. If 12d to the shilling was optimal, why were 1/2p and 1/4p required...? With the farthing, your shilling was base 48 - which is near-as-dammit indistinguishable from 50, which is what you'd have the £ divisible into if we got shot of the 1p... Why not go the whole hog, abolish the tuppence as well, and then we have the shilling (5p) as the smallest unit. Divisible by 20, so we can claim to be taking back control of our currency and reliving the golden age of 20 shillings to the pound.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 21, 2021 12:43:19 GMT
Whitworth was a fantastic Engineer, sorted out industrialisation long before Ford or whoever really started Oldsmobile, (don't believe Wiki on that one it was probably a Mr Smith). The moving assembly line goes back to the Venetians, as early as the 12th century... They had a mahoosively long ship production line, with the boat starting from a skeleton frame at one end, and plopping off the other end straight into the water - even mentioned by Dante. And Adam Smith's pin factory, of course, a century before Whitworth.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 21, 2021 13:09:09 GMT
Whitworth was a fantastic Engineer, sorted out industrialisation long before Ford or whoever really started Oldsmobile, (don't believe Wiki on that one it was probably a Mr Smith). He was working prior to 1897 (one of the most critical dates in Engineering history BTW) and he also produced an amazing sniper's rifle with hexagonal bore. AF of course was merely Across the Flats measurement of a hexagon.
Not just a hexagonal bore (which would be hopeless of course) but a rifled hexagonal bore at that. Producing an accurate hexagonal spiral must have been a work of genius back then. His rifle was reported as more accurate at 1400m than the standard Enfield was at 500m! Apparently also introduced Engineers Blue. I've learned two things today, thank you @bobo . 😊
|
|
kmac
Member of DD Central
Posts: 71
Likes: 70
|
Post by kmac on Feb 21, 2021 13:20:06 GMT
At the time of decimalisation, I was working for a large engineering company and was put in charge of the change over.. We had 32 factories in the UK so there was no way I handle the detail at all these sites, so I nominated a local coordinator at each site. Thesev happened to be all men as women were non evistent in middle management. In order to determine what was involved, I asked them all to go to every corner af the site that they were responsible for and to list everthing that needed to be changed to cope with the new currency. I insructed them to go into every room and look into every cupboard and every drawer. From this we were able to produce a plan to redesign forms, and to arrange for machinery to be replaced or modified.
On D day I rang each of the coordinators to check everything was OK. And all hell let loose. The women were complaining that the machines in the ladies loos had not been adjusted for the new coins and so were only available to any one who happened to have some old pennies in their handbags!
It all worked out OK. The manfacturer of the machines (Johnson and Johnson?) had forseen this would happen and had set up an operation to supply conversion kits with delivery the next day. It also caused me to arrange that if any body was set up to consider change, it should include a least one woman and for me to recruit for my own team a couple of women.
Around that time, I wanted some 1inch chicken wire, so I went to the local ironmonger - remenber them? - and asked for it. The sales assistant brought it to me an put in on the counter and was called away so left me for a minute or two. I looked at the price tag on the roll. On one side it had a price for 1 inch chicken wire and on the reverse a lower price for 25mm chicken wire. I was also refurbishing my kitchen and wanted some vinyl flooring. For some peculiar reason, 2 metres wide was the exact width I needed (my house was built in 1923 so why was this?) but when we found the pattern that we liked it was ony available in 6ft wide. We continued our search and eventually found a shop that had it in 2 metres so I asked for the length I needed in metres. The assistant was confused by this as he only understood feet and inches, so I converted my needs to feet and inches which he cut off. He then got a piece of scrap paper , likked the end of his pencil and started to work out my bill. After some consideration, he said "I can't work out a price for this as it is more than 2 yards wide and it is priced per square yard. Would it be OK if I cut off the edge so that it is 2 yards wide?"
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 21, 2021 13:48:57 GMT
I'm talking about why 12 pence to the shilling was useful in the past, having factors was important so that you could change down your shilling to smaller amounts (when a shilling was a significant sum) without getting a pocketful of pennies. If 12d to the shilling was optimal, why were 1/2p and 1/4p required...? With the farthing, your shilling was base 48 - which is near-as-dammit indistinguishable from 50, which is what you'd have the £ divisible into if we got shot of the 1p... I believe the 1/2 penny and 1/4 penny were initially literally pennies cut into pieces, because even a penny was too big a denomination for poor people (talking silver pennies with intrinsic value). We also had to re-introduce a half penny with metrification because a 'new' penny had more than twice the value of an old penny, so a new half penny gave a much closer conversion to an old penny.
|
|