Will you collect the DC & US Territories quarter dollars?

MTHead-migration · July 12, 2008

Wiki-article with designs

2009 will see the release of 6 additional quarters as an addendum to the State Quarter program:

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, U.S. Virgin Islands and Northern Mariana Islands.

How interested are you in collecting these coins?

We will add a page to our SQ Dansco and include the P & D mintmarks.

Wiki-Gems: check # 16 (Susan Headley and In God We Rust) and # 24 (Daniel Carr's State Quarter parody)

bsshog40 · July 12, 2008

Seeings how these were added as an addition to the statehood qtr program, I will be adding the dansco page for these.

okbustchaser · July 12, 2008

No, I won't. But then, I didn't collect the states either.

BankNote1 · July 12, 2008

Sense I didn't collect the first 50 I doubt that I will collect the last 6!

Dwaine · July 12, 2008

Seeings how these were added as an addition to the statehood qtr program, I will be adding the dansco page for these.

Yes, I will collect the PDSS version of these and will purchase the additional dansco page.

zrlevin · July 12, 2008

I will only collect them if they come in the proof set.

physics-fan3.14 · July 12, 2008

There's gonna be 6 more? Bugger. I've got the deluxe Whitman Thumb-buster, and it just happens to have an additional row after 2008 (they must have figured something like this would happen), but each row only has five slots (well, 5 each P and D). So which territory is gonna get bumped?

BillJones · July 12, 2008

I collect Proof sets and have one from every year since 1942. Therefore I'll be collecting theh territorial coins in that form. I don't have state quarter business strike album. My mother-in-law has a set of state quarters that my wife as kept up for here. I guess I'll get that one if she ever breaks up her house.

DC Dawg · July 12, 2008

I will be buying the new pages for my Whitman album and Harris folder updates at the ANA in Baltimore. Albums are for the uncirculated coins and the folders are for those I pick from change.

Scott :hi:

michael · July 13, 2008

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

physics-fan3.14 · July 13, 2008

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no yo no no
no no yo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no eo no

no no no eo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no so

no no no no so no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no so no no no no no no no

no no no yo eo so no no no no no no eo no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no yo no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no yesno no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no yo ne ns no no no no

no no no yo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no eo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no so no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

Very clever of you to encode your true intentions in there like that. Kind of subliminal messaging I guess? :devil:

BULLY · July 13, 2008

As any modern collector must realize, it is most cost effective to collect coins at issue price when they are released from the US Mint, or in rolls from banks, etc. Therefore, I will purchase rolls at banks proof sets, silver proof sets, etc. Having the coins missing from a collection could be detrimental to a complete modern coin collection in years to come, and acquiring the coins at a later date could be much more costly than buying them at issue price and/or face value.

Some people are oddly against the additional coins, and I wonder the real reasons.

Is it that the coins were unplanned from the start?

Are people just tired of spending more money on coins to "keep up?"

Is it that they are not states, and it was called a "state quarters" program?

Or could it be that "illegal immigration" is a hot topic, and many people are basically xenophobic, so even though these ARE territories of the U.S. so illegals do not come into play (since people from these territories carry US passports), there is a misguides sense of "hatred" for the coins? I don't want this line to become a flaming issue on the boards or for there to be messages flying for days and weeks. I'd rather it be more of a reflective issue - in other words, FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

Along the same line, is there just a false sense of so-called "patriotism," and anything that is not "a state" is just un-American? Again, I am not trying to ruin the boards here with a political hot potato, I am just asking what MAY be the hard question. Therefore, let's think about this MORE TO OURSELVES. So please don't turn it into a flaming political war on here.

I just wonder about the REAL deep dark reasons people have for SO STRONGLY opposing six little coins that do nothing but commemorate territories that the U.S. has basically "taken" at one point or another as part of it's colonial history. Nothing much different than say Hawaii, which was, after all, a Kingdom of its own. Somehow fewer objections to a Hawaiian quarter because it's a state (thought hasn't been for very long). Where exactly does the difference come into play? What is that fine line?

Wiki-article with designs

2009 will see the release of 6 additional quarters as an addendum to the State Quarter program:

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, U.S. Virgin Islands and Northern Mariana Islands.

How interested are you in collecting these coins?

pendragon1998 · July 13, 2008

I'm a little burned out on the series, but I plan on buying the mint set this year to keep up with my other sets (rather than roll search for 2008 dated stuff), so I'll do the same next year as well. In any case, I'm only collecting a one-coin (P or D) per state/territory set in my Whitman album, so I can always sell the other half of the mint set's quarters to recoup a couple bucks.

zrlevin · July 13, 2008

I'm a little burned out on the series, but I plan on buying the mint set this year to keep up with my other sets (rather than roll search for 2008 dated stuff), so I'll do the same next year as well. In any case, I'm only collecting a one-coin (P or D) per state/territory set in my Whitman album, so I can always sell the other half of the mint set's quarters to recoup a couple bucks.

The mint set will be Satin Finish, and will not match the rest of your coins.

pendragon1998 · July 13, 2008

This is kind of interesting (from Wikipedia):

The District of Columbia submitted three different designs to the United States mint for its quarter: one with the District's flag, one depicting Benjamin Banneker, and one depicting Duke Ellington.[10] The District suggested that each of the three designs include either the words "Taxation Without Representation" or "No Taxation Without Representation",[10] both of which refer to the District's efforts to obtain full representation in Congress.[11] The Mint rejected both messages, because of its prohibition against printing controversial inscriptions on coins.[11] The Mint said that, while it takes no stance on the voting rights of the District, it considers the messages controversial because there is currently "no national consensus" on the issue.[11] In response, the District revised its designs for the quarter, replacing the text with "Justice for All", [12] which is the District's motto.[11] The District also changed the design with the District's flag to a design depicting Frederick Douglass.[12]

"No taxation without representation" began as a slogan in the period 1763–1776 that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the thirteen American colonies. In recent times, it has been used by several other groups and in relation to other issues.

The Americans rejected the Stamp Act 1765 (which was repealed), and in 1773 violently rejected the tax on tea imports at the Boston Tea Party. The British could not accept this illegal act because it undermined the authority of the Crown in Parliament.

Why should "No taxation without representation" controversial?

...wait...sorry, I forgot what country I'm living in these days. Never mind.

MTHead-migration · July 13, 2008

Why should "No taxation without representation" controversial?

It reminds DC residents that they are subject to all federal laws and taxes while having no representation in the federal government

JKK · July 13, 2008

I would have thought the DC state quarter would feature a mugging or a drive-by with a Mac-10.

I don't plan to collect the state quarters, but I have no objection to the concept of making quarters for other parts of our empire.

MAULEMALL · July 13, 2008

More like Marion with a crack pipe. (thumbs u

BankNote1 · July 14, 2008

The District of Columbia submitted three different designs to the United States mint for its quarter: one with the District's flag, one depicting Benjamin Banneker, and one depicting Duke Ellington.[10] The District suggested that each of the three designs include either the words "Taxation Without Representation" or "No Taxation Without Representation",[10] both of which refer to the District's efforts to obtain full representation in Congress.

Heck I am not for taxation WITH representation!

DC Dawg · July 14, 2008

More like Marion with a crack pipe. (thumbs u

Now that's the best suggestion I've heard!! (thumbs u

They didn't take my more serious suggestion to honor Walter Washington, the first mayor of the unified District of Columbia after granting of Home Rule in 1975. Prior to 1975, DC was run by a Board of Commissioners appointed by the president. The last mayor of DC was in 1871 but served along side a mayor of Georgetown. In 1872, the Board of Commissioners were formed to run all of the district. Walter Washington was the last Board president before granting of Home Rule.

By honoring Walter Washington, DC activists could have used it to teach the history of how the Federal government used the District without regard to the residents and how it had taken almost 200 years since the declaration of independence from England to show how DC has been and continues to be abused by the federal government.

The District of Columbia is the only national capital in the world to be so disenfranchised. For all the talk about equality and "fairness," the District of Columbia is never included, even though the federal government levies taxes on the District, which they do not do for the other territories and protectorates.

But, those missed a prime opportunity to make a subtle statement. But I guess that was beyond their feeble little brains. IMHO!!

Scott :hi:

michael · July 14, 2008

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no yo no no
no no yo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no eo no

no no no eo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no so

no no no no so no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no so no no no no no no no

no no no yo eo so no no no no no no eo no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no yo no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no yesno no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no yo ne ns no no no no

no no no yo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no eo no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

no no no no no so no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

Very clever of you to encode your true intentions in there like that. Kind of subliminal messaging I guess?

lol

lehigh96 · July 14, 2008