# Republicans think you need $1 trillion worth of platinum in a $1 trillion face value platinum coin **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 9, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642 "2013-01-09T16:52:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/101 "2013-01-11T17:42:40Z")
Obviously its not the main problem with the comic, but it is sort of unintentionally funny that to demonstrate how heavy the coin would be is to say it would sink a ship that’s primarily famous for being surprisingly easy to sink. You’d think they could come up with a ship that’s famous for _not sinking_. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/102 "2013-01-11T17:44:29Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Wouldn’t a coin that big be enough to sink the Titanic? Depends. Would you sell me an iceberg for a trillion dollars? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/103 "2013-01-11T17:47:16Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Obviously its not the main problem with the comic, but it is sort of unintentionally funny that to demonstrate how heavy the coin would be is to say it would sink a ship that’s primarily famous for being surprisingly easy to sink. You’d think they could come up with a ship that’s famous for _not sinking_. Obviously the _Mayflower_ would have been the correct choice here. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/104 "2013-01-11T17:47:29Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Depends. Would you sell me an iceberg for a trillion dollars? I’d love to. When would you like it delivered? Will that be cash or charge? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/105 "2013-01-11T17:50:23Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > And any-anyway, this has fuck all to do with the trillion dollar coin. It is useful for the introduction of the term ‘whip-ship’, though I suggest dropping the hyphen. Dude, my congressman is a total Whipship! ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/106 "2013-01-11T17:58:24Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Even though both potato chips and seigniorage exist, the existence of neither of them necessarily carries the implication that under the specific law authorizing platinum coins the coins don’t need to contain their value in metal. An absence of an implication of a negation of an unstated requirement? :dubious: > [@RTFirefly](#): > > The one thing I will point out is that the relationship between our coinage and the value of the metal contained in it has long since been severed. Oldies like me remember when dimes and quarters used to be silver; that ended in the mid-1960s. > [@septimus](#): > > 1981 pennies have more than two cents’ worth of copper. As I said, the intrinsic value of metal in a coin, and the legal-tender face value, are entirely independent. There are current minted examples both ways (legal-tender face values above and below metal price). The Supreme Court ruling I quoted was from, IIRC, 1910. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/107 "2013-01-11T18:01:43Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > That’s certainly easy to say, isn’t it? Give evidence, please. I’ve already done so, but beyond that, you’ve already admitted it. I’m not sure what your point might be here, in the unlikely event that you actually have one. > [@](#): > > You’re right, I was ignorant of objections that, to the best of my knowledge, hadn’t been raised yet. Golly gee. :rolleyes: Or, put slightly differently, you were ignorant of the law WRT the specific aspect of the law that you were mocking. > [@](#): > > Maybe you don’t understand what ‘ad hominem’ means. Please explain [which variety of the ad hominem fallacy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Types) I used. You responded to the specific argument put forth by Drum with > [@RTFirefly](#): > > Kevin Drum is not a lawyer, and his other arguments why the coin is illegal have already been shot down. So I’m not taking the need to rebut him on this one too seriously. That is an ad hominem response, FYI. > [@](#): > > Seems like a relevant fact to me. It would, if you’re confusing the general concept of coins with the specific law authorizing platinum coins. > [@](#): > > Now the actual _purpose_ of the platinum coin law was to raise money for the U.S. treasury by selling commemorative coins. The law would have obviously failed in its purpose if the $50, $100, $500 platinum coins had to have $50, $100, $500 worth of platinum. And I hope you’re not saying that the law says the $500 platinum coin would have had to be ten times as big as the $50 coin. > > Except it’s what you are saying - or at least saying is a real possibility. This is silly and ignorant even by your standards. The treasury raises money by selling these coins because they sell them for a lot more than the face value. It’s not because the face value is higher than the value of the metal. > [@](#): > > Well, he’s a heavy hitter in the legal world. So when he says that an interpretation of a law about coins that appears ridiculous based on everything we know about coins in general, commemorative coins in particular, and the purpose of the law itself really IS ridiculous, I’m inclined to take him at his word. Beyond noting again that he did not address that issue, I would also point out that he didn’t say that anything is ridiculous. > [@](#): > > It does when that’s the whole _point_ of producing commemorative coins. Dumbass. This is ignorance, as noted above. > [@](#): > > According to whom? You. Now you have proven yourself wrong. I gave my reason for assuming you have read the article in the sentence after the one I quoted. I said “You were responding to it.”. I would have thought that’s a reasonable assumption that if you were responding to an article that you would have actually read it. But perhaps the lesson here is that no assumptions about reasonable behavior should be applied to you. > [@](#): > > And I don’t see any evidence that either the NRCC or, later, Fox News, was relying on a detailed analysis of the law, but simply being stupid. > > If they get lucky and there’s some section of the law that says that, for platinum coins, unlike any other conventional or commemorative coins, the face value of the coin has to be approximately the value of the metal in the coin, _it doesn’t make them any smarter._ It’s like guessing the right answer on the math test, rather than working it out. Your posts are like lessons in logical fallacies (among other things). In this case, it’s called circular reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/108 "2013-01-11T18:21:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > ETA: \*\*this attitude, on a board supposedly interested in fighting ignorance, amazes me. \*\* > > “How dare you compare party leaders to a no-account backbencher?” > > “Um… that guy wasn’t a backbencher – he was a regional whip.” > > “Well, that sounds like a minor position to me!” > > Oh, OK. Since it sounds to you like a minor position, that ought to end the inquiry right there. No need to actually investigate your intuition or anything. I don’t really believe that the most effective use of my time and energy in the fight against ignorance is to hoover up EVERY previously unknown (to me) fact that approaches within a country mile of my position. _Sometimes_, and particularly when I’m not taking something very seriously, all I’m interested in doing is making a smart-ass remark. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/109 "2013-01-11T18:35:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now that you know this, do you still believe it’s correct to call him a “backbencher?” > > ETA: this attitude, on a board supposedly interested in fighting ignorance, amazes me. Debunked upthread. BTW, in a similar vein, did you approve of your fan who compared Biden’s forgetting a constituent’s mother’s maiden name to Bush’s invading Iraq to fight the Gog and Magog of _Revelations_ ? In future, we’d all appreciate it if you’d save time and bypass the middlemen: Just post your “thoughts” directly to the _Republicans say the stupidest things_ thread. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/110 "2013-01-11T18:41:37Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’ve already done so, but beyond that, you’ve already admitted it. Sorry, but criticizing my OP on the basis of something brought into the thread a bit later doesn’t fly. Time travelers strictly cash, and all that. > [@](#): > > You responded to the specific argument put forth by Drum with That is an ad hominem response, FYI. Umm, no it isn’t. Like I said, you don’t know what ‘ad hominem’ means. I was kind enough to link you to the Wikipedia page outlining the different kinds of ad-hominem fallacies. This isn’t one of them. Sorry, thanks for playing. And because you’ve demonstrated to my satisfaction what an idiot you are, and because there’s only so much meta even I can take, I think I’ll leave it there. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/111 "2013-01-11T18:43:18Z")
That’s fine with me. I think this exchange speaks for itself. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642/112 "2013-01-11T18:44:49Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That’s fine with me. > > I think this exchange speaks for itself. Clearly not in the way you think it does. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-think-you-need-1-trillion-worth-of-platinum-in-a-1-trillion-face-value-platinum-coin/646642.md?page=5)