Canadian Coin Grading

A friend of mine has a business that generates about 15000 pennies, nickles, dimes and quarters every month. He needs to purchase a good industrial grade machine (money no problem) that can count AND sort the coins. Also, the machine needs to be able to reject any and all non Canadian currency.

15k coins is not that many. Used to do that on a small arcade route in a month. I used a Klopp counter, this one did not have a sorter, but they do sell one with a sorter. Not sure about the Canadian side, but they have been at it awhile, and would be a good place to start.

2009-09-17 21:36:38 by Jim42

www.allcanadiancoins.ca - Rare Canadian Coins amp; numismatic coin collecting values, information, pictures, images, grading, appraisal and more ...

Hello,

I collect Canadian silver dollars, especially Proof Like coins. The big grading service up here is ICCS, but a lot of PCGS coins are around also. How can I get a population report on Canadian coins by PCGS. I have written them (PCGS) and they don't respond. I have read it can be found on the Heritage Auction site, where I go often, but can't find it. Anyone got any suggestions? Anyone got any top flight Canadian silver dollars they are tired of?

Thanks

from PCGS

2006-10-01 09:55:01 by zeolite

If I was to hold on to physical, investment grade 24k gold coins, such as the American Eagle or Canadian Maple leaf, is this liable to be appropriated via some sort of future lawsuit? I would be holding on to them for retirement.

From my very limited understanding, IRAs/401(k)s are ineligible to be seized through a lawsuit. I'm aware there are IRAs that are focused on precious metal, but I have a feeling you wouldn't be able to physically hold on to the metal, as they would be stored elsewhere.

South African Krugerrands, the current coins I'm looking into, are ineligible for these IRAs as they're only 22 karats (they're fortified with a copper alloy). Also from my understanding, Krugerrands are the only gold coins valued on the content of its gold, rather than the face value printed on the coin. So they're really the only coins I'm interested in investing in.

Anyone have any insight?

All assets in a IRA/401k/etc. must be held by an IRS approved trustee. Thus, you can not physically hold the coins. They must be stored by the trustee somewhere out of your control. There would be periodic storage charges and fees from the trustee. Gold coins pay no interest.

===============

The law does not permit IRA funds to be invested in collectibles. Here are some examples of collectibles:

* Artwork,
* Rugs,
* Antiques,
* Metals - there are exceptions for certain kinds of bullion,
* Gems,
* Stamps,
* Coins - there are exceptions for certain coins minted by the U.S. Treasury,
* Alcoholic beverages, and
* Certain other tangible personal property.

2009-03-15 10:37:44 by Scott M

Price: $69.95 $59.95

Save countless hours of dull data entry by selecting from our comprehensive database of coins from the USA, UK Canada.
How Much is Your Collection Worth? Find out now with our accurate up-to-date values for more grades than ever before.
CoinManage ships with numerous useful reports and includes a fully integrated report designer. Create reports, labels, charts and print or export to a variety of formats, including PDF, Excel and HTML.

In the following article, what meanind does holistic approach have??? also, how does holistic approach related to students?

We all know the most famous line in movies
when Rhett Butler said to Scarlett O’Hara,
“Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn,” but
another Butlerian comment to that same
southern belle carries a lot more meaning:
“What most people don’t seem to realize is
that there is just as much money to be made
out of the wreckage of a civilization as
from the upbuilding of one...I’m making
my fortune out of the wreckage.”
Today, as we close out the millennium
in a time of prosperity, it’s clear that the
wreckage of society is coming in many
forms, among them the continual erosion of
language. Indeed, language skills are at their
lowest ebb ever. For the past 30 years, edu-
cators have come up with every reason why
not to teach spelling, grammar, and punctu-
ation in favour of a “holistic” approach to
learning. The result is an entire generation
of people who aren’t up to snuff on basics.
Item. Earlier last year, an American televi-
sion news announcer—whose name I didn’t
catch—was commenting on the Senate
impeachment hearings, and what she said
still boggles my mind. “It’s just getting inter-
esting-er and interesting-er.”
Now she was young and pretty and if
those were the only requirements for a tele-
vision news announcer in the ’90s, terrific,
but it would be nice if they know some-
thing about words too. With her hair neatly
coiffed and her colours perfectly coordinat-
ed for the camera, she had the temerity to
coin a comparative right up there with fasci-
natinger, remarkabler, and tremendouser
and if we made these words superlatives,
we’d have fascinatingest, remarkablest, and
tremendousest.
She’s not alone. Spelling errors and bad
grammar are increasingly common in ads
and newspapers, never mind the Internet,
which is the best place to learn how not to
spell. Author Tom Wolfe calls the Internet
a “great time waster,” but he’s 68 and what
does he know? Maybe more than we think.
His colleague, Gore Vidal, once said:
“Fewer and fewer young people are addict-
ed to reading. If they don’t get into it from
the time they are 10 or 12 years old, they’ll
never enjoy reading, and if you don’t enjoy
reading, there goes literature. Literature is
still the most profound of arts, but its prog-
nosis is very bad.” Vidal said this six years
ago when the Internet was just coming out
of the embryo and now that it’s a child, our
young read even less than they did back in
’94, opting to surf instead.
In the middle of the last century, Alexis
de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America
that the future would result in an egalitarian
dismissal of excellence. Well, guess what?
The future is here! While companies like
Microsoft and IBM keep telling us about
the benefits of the Internet, who stops to
think that maybe no one is really benefit-
ing—except Microsoft and IBM?
Any parent with kids in high school
knows that standards aren’t what they used
to be. I teach writing to public relations stu-
dents in college, some of them with univer-
sity degrees and many from other countries.
Without fail, the ones with the worst profi-
ciency in English are those who were edu-
cated in Canada. Not Jamaica, Algeria, or
Russia. Canada.
A Canadian-educated student up on
grammar is a diamond in the rough; it’s usu-
ally due to a grade 9 English teacher who
went against the grain and stressed what the
curriculum abandoned.
What do you do with 20-year-olds who
are just learning the basics? I give them
some standard punctuation and the parts of
speech, tell them to toss “spellcheck” and
“grammarcheck” out the window, and take a
look at George Orwell’s “Six Rules of Good
Writing.” (Some of them have actually heard
of Orwell.) (See sidebar.) Come to think of
it, professionals could use these rules too.
Rules aside, it is also a good idea to
study both good and bad communicators.
Former US Secretary of State Alexander
Haig (“a dialectic fashion at one end of the
spectrum”), aspiring presidential candidate
Dan Quayle (“We Republicans understand
the importance of bondage between a
mother and child”), and many of our lead-
ers in Canada (anything Jean Chrétien says)
are all poor communicators. Winston
Churchill and Martin Luther King, on the
other hand, were wonderful. Unfortunately,
male cadavers are unyielding of testimony.
Huh? Sorry. I mean, “Dead men don’t talk.”
But that’s not really true. Their speeches
survive. Why not have a look?
Jerry Amernic of Wordcraft Communications is a
writer and public relations professional. This article
is reproduced with permission from the Readers
Showcase, Vol. VII, Issue 4.
Language Out, Style In
JERRY AMERNIC
Six Rules of Good
Writing
GEORGE ORWELL (with addition-
al comments by JERRY AMERNIC)
1.
Never use a figure of
speech which you are not used
to seeing in print. This brings to
mind techies who use “connec-
tivity,” “multi-tasking,” and
“design methodology” when
they should just try to speak
plain English.
2.
Never use a long word
where a short one will do. A
popular phrase like “home
sweet home” would never have
lasted if the original was “resi-
dence sweet residence.”
3.
If it’s possible to cut out a
word, always cut it out. Lawyers
are especially guilty of breaking
this rule. Example. “If the com-
pany revises this policy form
with respect to policy revisions,
endorsements or rules by which
the insurance hereunder could
be extended or broadened with-
out additional premium charge,
such insurance as is afforded
hereunder shall be extended or
broadened effective immediate-
ly upon approval or acceptance
of such revision during the poli-
cy by the appropriate insurance
supervisory authority.” Doesn’t
it work better this way? “We
will automatically give you the
benefits of any extension of this
policy if the change doesn’t
require additional cost.” By the
way, the word count dropped
from 59 to 20, so a pox on all
those history and English
majors who think it’s better to
use more words.
4.
Never use the passive
where you can use the active.
This is any politician’s pet
peeve; be vague and don’t take
responsibility for anything (and
your writing will be as exciting
as a Hansard debate).
5.
Never use a foreign phrase,
a scientific word or jargon word
if you can think of an everyday
English equivalent. (See lawyer
example in No. 3).
6.
Break any of these rules
sooner than say anything out-
right barbarous. In other words,
a good lead with 18 words is
still better than a bad one with
15, but we should still strive to
say more with less.

The holistic approach is the "overall" content of the essay. When you judge an essay with the holistic approach you are trying to decide if this essay is on topic, worded well, has a few errors (possibly) but does not detract from the meaning. Is there a topic sentence? Is there enough commentary and details? Is the voice correct for the audience? and so on. The spelling, grammar and punctuation are only a small part of the whole assignment.

The student is not learning how to spell words correctly, how to use correct grammar and punctuation or possibly making paragraphs correctly. The emphasis is on the whole, not on the basics.

2007-10-16 22:02:47 by sharon j

okay I just have a couple of questions on the following article. It's a funny article about language nowadays. you should read it. Anyways, my questions are: What does the wreckage of society part mean? Also, what importance does the introduction play and I am still counting but if you do note down how many examples he uses to prove the main points and in how many paragraphs please do tell me. thanks so much! thsi is not my homework. its from a practice sheet in my improving your english guide. there are no answers so I just want some opinions. thanks.here is the article.

We all know the most famous line in movies
when Rhett Butler said to Scarlett O’Hara,
“Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn,” but
another Butlerian comment to that same
southern belle carries a lot more meaning:
“What most people don’t seem to realize is
that there is just as much money to be made
out of the wreckage of a civilization as
from the upbuilding of one...I’m making
my fortune out of the wreckage.”
Today, as we close out the millennium
in a time of prosperity, it’s clear that the
wreckage of society is coming in many
forms, among them the continual erosion of
language. Indeed, language skills are at their
lowest ebb ever. For the past 30 years, edu-
cators have come up with every reason why
not to teach spelling, grammar, and punctu-
ation in favour of a “holistic” approach to
learning. The result is an entire generation
of people who aren’t up to snuff on basics.
Item. Earlier last year, an American televi-
sion news announcer—whose name I didn’t
catch—was commenting on the Senate
impeachment hearings, and what she said
still boggles my mind. “It’s just getting inter-
esting-er and interesting-er.”
Now she was young and pretty and if
those were the only requirements for a tele-
vision news announcer in the ’90s, terrific,
but it would be nice if they know some-
thing about words too. With her hair neatly
coiffed and her colours perfectly coordinat-
ed for the camera, she had the temerity to
coin a comparative right up there with fasci-
natinger, remarkabler, and tremendouser
and if we made these words superlatives,
we’d have fascinatingest, remarkablest, and
tremendousest.
She’s not alone. Spelling errors and bad
grammar are increasingly common in ads
and newspapers, never mind the Internet,
which is the best place to learn how not to
spell. Author Tom Wolfe calls the Internet
a “great time waster,” but he’s 68 and what
does he know? Maybe more than we think.
His colleague, Gore Vidal, once said:
“Fewer and fewer young people are addict-
ed to reading. If they don’t get into it from
the time they are 10 or 12 years old, they’ll
never enjoy reading, and if you don’t enjoy
reading, there goes literature. Literature is
still the most profound of arts, but its prog-
nosis is very bad.” Vidal said this six years
ago when the Internet was just coming out
of the embryo and now that it’s a child, our
young read even less than they did back in
’94, opting to surf instead.
In the middle of the last century, Alexis
de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America
that the future would result in an egalitarian
dismissal of excellence. Well, guess what?
The future is here! While companies like
Microsoft and IBM keep telling us about
the benefits of the Internet, who stops to
think that maybe no one is really benefit-
ing—except Microsoft and IBM?
Any parent with kids in high school
knows that standards aren’t what they used
to be. I teach writing to public relations stu-
dents in college, some of them with univer-
sity degrees and many from other countries.
Without fail, the ones with the worst profi-
ciency in English are those who were edu-
cated in Canada. Not Jamaica, Algeria, or
Russia. Canada.
A Canadian-educated student up on
grammar is a diamond in the rough; it’s usu-
ally due to a grade 9 English teacher who
went against the grain and stressed what the
curriculum abandoned.
What do you do with 20-year-olds who
are just learning the basics? I give them
some standard punctuation and the parts of
speech, tell them to toss “spellcheck” and
“grammarcheck” out the window, and take a
look at George Orwell’s “Six Rules of Good
Writing.” (Some of them have actually heard
of Orwell.) (See sidebar.) Come to think of
it, professionals could use these rules too.
Rules aside, it is also a good idea to
study both good and bad communicators.
Former US Secretary of State Alexander
Haig (“a dialectic fashion at one end of the
spectrum”), aspiring presidential candidate
Dan Quayle (“We Republicans understand
the importance of bondage between a
mother and child”), and many of our lead-
ers in Canada (anything Jean Chrétien says)
are all poor communicators. Winston
Churchill and Martin Luther King, on the
other hand, were wonderful. Unfortunately,
male cadavers are unyielding of testimony.
Huh? Sorry. I mean, “Dead men don’t talk.”
But that’s not really true. Their speeches
survive. Why not have a look?
Jerry Amernic of Wordcraft Communications is a
writer and public relations professional. This article
is reproduced with permission from the Readers
Showcase, Vol. VII, Issue 4.
Language Out, Style In
JERRY AMERNIC
Six Rules of Good
Writing
GEORGE ORWELL (with addition-
al comments by JERRY AMERNIC)
1.
Never use a figure of
speech which you are not used
to seeing in print. This brings to
mind techies who use “connec-
tivity,” “multi-tasking,” and
“design methodology” when
they should just try to speak
plain English.
2.
Never use a long word
where a short one will do. A
popular phrase like “home
sweet home” would never have
lasted if the original was “resi-
dence sweet residence.”
3.
If it’s possible to cut out a
word, always cut it out. Lawyers
are especially guilty of breaking
this rule. Example. “If the com-
pany revises this policy form
with respect to policy revisions,
endorsements or rules by which
the insurance hereunder could
be extended or broadened with-
out additional premium charge,
such insurance as is afforded
hereunder shall be extended or
broadened effective immediate-
ly upon approval or acceptance
of such revision during the poli-
cy by the appropriate insurance
supervisory authority.” Doesn’t
it work better this way? “We
will automatically give you the
benefits of any extension of this
policy if the change doesn’t
require additional cost.” By the
way, the word count dropped
from 59 to 20, so a pox on all
those history and English
majors who think it’s better to
use more words.
4.
Never use the passive
where you can use the active.
This is any politician’s pet
peeve; be vague and don’t take
responsibility for anything (and
your writing will be as exciting
as a Hansard debate).
5.
Never use a foreign phrase,
a scientific word or jargon word
if you can think of an everyday
English equivalent. (See lawyer
example in No. 3).
6.
Break any of these rules
sooner than say anything out-
right barbarous. In other words,
a good lead with 18 words is
still better than a bad one with
15, but we should still strive to
say more with less.

The wreckage of society means how society is falling apart; in this case, how the language is going downhill.

The introduction is about things getting wrecked, leading into the article's idea of language getting wrecked.

He gives six examples.

There are seven paragraphs.

2007-10-16 22:24:33 by x98_sceptre