1949threepence

This was the e mail I received from London Coins on 10th May:- The bit I've put in italics didn't happen, unless they are referring to post auction, in which case they failed to make that bit clear.

Oh, after the auction is over, I wouldn't disagree with that. But my point is that had I known whilst the auction was still on, that I'd been outbid, I might have made a higher bid. But there was no information relating to that, as far as I can tell. You would have thought that they would have posted the latest highest bid on the auction site. But no, nothing.

Left 2 bids and got an acknowledgement back. Not heard any results yet. Results have just gone online Just checked them. Was outbid on both the ones I was interested in. But never informed, nor could I find anywhere in which the superior bids were posted. Dunno, maybe it's me being a bit dense, but I'm not sure I could have made a higher bid without actually knowing I'd been outbid in the first place

Well apparently all over now, but I've not heard a single solitary thing. Don;t know how many bids there were for anything, how much was bid, whether my bids were successful or otherwise, or even where to find the results. Anybody else heard anything ?

Copper 1849 penny Bronze Pennies 1860 "mule": beaded border on one side, toothed on the other 1862 8 over 6 1863 with die No below date 1864 (plain or crosslet) in EF or above. Common in lower grades, exceedingly scarce in higher. 1865 5 over 3, again in EF or above. Not that scarce in lower to mid grade (fantastic example on this site) 1869 once again in EF or above. Although considered the "Holy Grail" of pennies, in truth it's not too scarce in lower grades. 1871 in high grade 1875H in high grade 1876H wide date in high grade 1877 narrow date 1879 narrow date 1881 (quite difficult to get in any grade, took me a long time) 1895 with trident 2mm from "P" of penny, in high grade 1918KN & 1919KN in high grade 1926 modfied effigy in mid to high grade. Incidentally, Tony Clayton's site may be a bit out of date for prices, but he has some fantastic coins pictured. See here

Very, very nice ~ and much higher grade than fine. Look at the hair detail on the King's head. That would grade as NEF or EF. Good start to your collection.

Take a look at some of the prices here Not sure if this is the auction referred to, as the prices are at variance with those quoted, but they give you some idea. The Americans seem very keen on proofs as well. Possibly much more so than we are.

Very good thing. Can you imagine coins in circulation with the heads of Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown & Cameron on them ? Not a nice thought. Just so. He certainly fits the bill on that score

Neat picture, Mongo !!! All respect to the Queen, though. She's not put a foot wrong in 60 years. An amazing feat for someone in the public eye. What I want to know is, why, when she's 86 years old, she doen't even look 50 on her banknote portrait

Sorry Rob, I used up all my energy and time responding to Colin's points about disability benefits. I've nothing left for the banking situation. I'll read it all tomorrow and see if I have a sensible response to make. Not to worry, we'll all agree to disagree in the end. I can't comment on the history of the Eurozone and its economic woes, but I was thinking earlier about your (and many others') analogy between the state and an ordinary household, i.e. how a state should 'balance the books' like householders have to do, and I was thinking that as an analogy it leaves something to be desired! After all, the average householder has a mortgage - i.e. they are in deficit. They may use all the overdraft facility their bank offers - another deficit. And if someone wants to start a small business up, maybe employing one or two people, where do they get the funds to begin? That's right, from a loan, i.e. another deficit, even though that particular deficit may put money back into the wider economy from wages paid and goods produced and sold. So I guess a state is acting no different, especially if you believe in Keynesian economics (which I do) which got many a failing economy out of a dire hole in the 20th Century. It's ok, my anger's gone now! I think the source of my frustration is how many ordinary, decent, intelligent people just have no idea what's going on. Why? Because they're not informed. If you have time or inclination, do have a look into these factors : 1. The role of one Mansel Aylward in promoting the "Social Model" of illness (a large part of which is the theory - rubbished by many healthcare professionals - that in a welfare state people deliberately or otherwise develop symptoms of illness; and that some illnesses, i.e. backache, are almost entirely figments of the imagination; this theory has subsequently been extended by its adherents to include even MS). In his time, Aylward was both a senior official of the DWP and also on the board of UNUM Provident, the giant American health insurance company. 2. The 'selling' of this theory by Aylward and UNUM in the 1990s to the DWP and all governments from Major's onwards. The evolution of ESA to replace Incapacity Benefit as a result, purely as an agent to reduce the welfare budget. 3. The role of UNUM Provident in America, where they routinely denied disability benefits to people who had paid premiums and then had illnesses or disabilities and claimed on their UNUM policies. UNUM were described in some US Courts as a 'benefits denial factory' and banned from operating in certain States. 4. The role of Atos Origin, a French IT firm who are or have been wholly owned by UNUM Provident, in administering the Work Capability Assessments on Britain's disabled, using the techniques acquired from UNUM to give seriously disabled people "null points' and thus deny them benefits. 5. The LIMA software developed by UNUM and Atos which asks "healthcare professionals" to ask the client a range of questions with a YES / NO tick box to complete, with no subtlety relating to people with complex and varying conditions. To give one example "Do you watch soaps on TV?" is interpreted by the software that a person can sit for half an hour and fully concentrate on a task. I've barely scratched the surface. It's a long and tricky story that has evolved over 20 years. It makes unhappy reading. The problem with the tick box mentality is its simplicity, naivety, deliberately built in bias, and most obvious of all, the total absence of a "none of the above" option. Many of the Doctors who have to perform personal capability assessments on individuals, are very intelligent individuals, and I can imagine just how irritated they must feel when a person who is patently incapable of meaningful work, is systematically tramlined into a finding of "fit for work" via the wording of the questions which must be asked, and the snapshot nature of the tests concerned. My personal scepticism in this regard applies especially to the mental health aspects of the test, which in no way lends itself to ticking boxes. Absolutely agree, especially with respect to the mental health issues which even now aren't properly resolved despite Professor Harrington's (hired by the governemnt to do an independent report) many criticisms of the process. And the PCA which you mention was positively benign compared to the current WCA which is the route to ESA ("Personal" replaced by "Work", you notice). It is to get worse, much worse, next year when DLA - paid to the disabled whether in work or out of it - is to be replaced by PIP, with a mandated 20% reduction in the bill, irrespective of whether this reflects the needs of the disabled or not. I know, Peck. My girlfriend suffers from quite severe rheumatoid arthritis, which limits her mobility to a significant extent, and causes a lot of pain. Although she does still soldier on at work, her DLA mobility allowance will no doubt be under threat when the new Personal Independence Payments come into effect.

Sorry Rob, I used up all my energy and time responding to Colin's points about disability benefits. I've nothing left for the banking situation. I'll read it all tomorrow and see if I have a sensible response to make. Not to worry, we'll all agree to disagree in the end. I can't comment on the history of the Eurozone and its economic woes, but I was thinking earlier about your (and many others') analogy between the state and an ordinary household, i.e. how a state should 'balance the books' like householders have to do, and I was thinking that as an analogy it leaves something to be desired! After all, the average householder has a mortgage - i.e. they are in deficit. They may use all the overdraft facility their bank offers - another deficit. And if someone wants to start a small business up, maybe employing one or two people, where do they get the funds to begin? That's right, from a loan, i.e. another deficit, even though that particular deficit may put money back into the wider economy from wages paid and goods produced and sold. So I guess a state is acting no different, especially if you believe in Keynesian economics (which I do) which got many a failing economy out of a dire hole in the 20th Century. It's ok, my anger's gone now! I think the source of my frustration is how many ordinary, decent, intelligent people just have no idea what's going on. Why? Because they're not informed. If you have time or inclination, do have a look into these factors : 1. The role of one Mansel Aylward in promoting the "Social Model" of illness (a large part of which is the theory - rubbished by many healthcare professionals - that in a welfare state people deliberately or otherwise develop symptoms of illness; and that some illnesses, i.e. backache, are almost entirely figments of the imagination; this theory has subsequently been extended by its adherents to include even MS). In his time, Aylward was both a senior official of the DWP and also on the board of UNUM Provident, the giant American health insurance company. 2. The 'selling' of this theory by Aylward and UNUM in the 1990s to the DWP and all governments from Major's onwards. The evolution of ESA to replace Incapacity Benefit as a result, purely as an agent to reduce the welfare budget. 3. The role of UNUM Provident in America, where they routinely denied disability benefits to people who had paid premiums and then had illnesses or disabilities and claimed on their UNUM policies. UNUM were described in some US Courts as a 'benefits denial factory' and banned from operating in certain States. 4. The role of Atos Origin, a French IT firm who are or have been wholly owned by UNUM Provident, in administering the Work Capability Assessments on Britain's disabled, using the techniques acquired from UNUM to give seriously disabled people "null points' and thus deny them benefits. 5. The LIMA software developed by UNUM and Atos which asks "healthcare professionals" to ask the client a range of questions with a YES / NO tick box to complete, with no subtlety relating to people with complex and varying conditions. To give one example "Do you watch soaps on TV?" is interpreted by the software that a person can sit for half an hour and fully concentrate on a task. I've barely scratched the surface. It's a long and tricky story that has evolved over 20 years. It makes unhappy reading. The problem with the tick box mentality is its simplicity, naivety, deliberately built in bias, and most obvious of all, the total absence of a "none of the above" option. Many of the Doctors who have to perform personal capability assessments on individuals, are very intelligent individuals, and I can imagine just how irritated they must feel when a person who is patently incapable of meaningful work, is systematically tramlined into a finding of "fit for work" via the wording of the questions which must be asked, and the snapshot nature of the tests concerned. My personal scepticism in this regard applies especially to the mental health aspects of the test, which in no way lends itself to ticking boxes.

Link not working for me, any chance of resending it. Yeah, sure. Don't know what happened there, it was definitely working when I first posted it, as I always check them to make sure. Anyway here it is again !!!

Oh that it was so simple. The current cutback on public spending is b****r all to do with the banks, but a rebalancing of the state's expenditure. When Brown was Chancellor, he presided over a state spending plan that raised 44% less in tax than he spent over a five year period. This he called prudence. Heaven knows what he would have done had he decided to be imprudent in his eyes, but I suggest the lights would already have gone out. Any Chancellor has to balance the books over the period of a parliament or at least have a plan to do so if the policies are to have any credibility. Failure to do so without a rigged voting system ensuring 5 more years in advance means the government of the day can spend as much as it likes giving lots of freebies to the voter without being held to account and having to rectify the s**t it leaves for the next election victor. Politicians being self-congratulatory animals only want public endorsement of their policies. Playing Father Christmas is the easiest way to win the appoval of Mr Average UK who is on the whole pretty thick when it comes to the wider picture. Rhetorical question, but why do people who are rational and live within their means as far as their own household is concerned suddenly throw financial common sense out of the window when it comes to public expenditure. The clarion calls of "Tax the rich" will always appeal to the have nots and many of those on the left, but sequesting the assets of those who on the whole are the main generators of business wealth is not the right way to go about it. Until the left learns to back business and the creation of private wealth generated through exporting this country's products to foreigners, this country is on a hiding to nothing. Yes, that means acknowledging that profit must not be a dirty word. There is no such thing as a free lunch and so if you want benefits for the citizens of this country, then come up with a sustainable plan for them whereby funding is supplied by taxing the profits of ongoing trade surplusses with A, B & C. If this country is in the s**t, then s**t we need to export until the level is low enough to keep our heads above water. The banks may have lent irresponsibly to developers and whatever, but the biggest problems are going to be sovereign loans. Countries borrow on many multiples of the loans even to large multi-nationals. The only problem is that politicians spend most of their time and government income bribing their electorates to ensure a further ride on the gravy train. This is typically presented as "investment", but is rarely is applied to projects involving private enterprises exporting goods to others, rather it is a way of ensuring that your mates are looked after at the expense of the taxpayer. You can build roads, railways, runways and other infrastructure projects all you like, but none of these will generate income from exports. We need to make the pots and pans that are currently imported. Replace imports with home produced goods. Export the same if you can. When governments are forced to take steps to balance the books they introduce unpopular plans by removing the free lunch, get voted out, and the whole unhappy cycle starts all over again. We've seen it year-in, year-out in Europe. Maximum deficit levels which are broken year after year on the grounds that this year, last year and every year for the forseeable future is/was/will be an exceptional year meaning the rules can be broken ad-infinitum. Until the west gets a real bloody nose to awaken it from the cozy existence it has embraced for the last 60 years, the penny won't drop. If people want social benefits, then set up an industrial and fiscal structure that will deliver year on year rather than introducing things by popular demand without giving due thought to funding. You cannot have a balanced economy based on spending money you neither have, nor are willing to generate. Unless Johnny Foreigner buys the goods and services of this country, people had better scale back their visions of the ongoing free lunch. The biggest danger in the current setup are the politicans who would rarely put country before party re-election - not the banks. Rant over. I'm afraid it has everything to do with the banks. What has occurred is not a little local UK difficulty, but rather a global meltdown of epic proportions, caused, initiated and fully orchestrated by the financial services sector globally. It's not just public spending which has been affected, but in addition, nearly all enterprises have cut back on staff, and salaries have been cut, whether in real or absolute terms. Whilst I agree with much of what you say in the sense of a normal times economic adjustment, I profoundly disagree that the banks had bugger all to do with the cutback in public spending. Moroever, they are responsible for a whole lot more besides. We have varied between Keynesian and freemarket economics for many decades. But when in the lifetime of anybody here, have we faced the austerity package we all face today ? I'd state as a hard fact that living standards have not fallen to the extent they have over the last 4 years, since before the 1950's. Even Mervyn King blames the banks for the mess we are in. click here

Absolutely spot on, Peck. The problem with the shooting of Mark Duggan is that the entire proceedings is shrouded in mystery. Was he a gun toting low life chav on his way to despatch a rival gang member, or was he, as you say, an unarmed man who was the victim of a planned police execution ? Who knows ~ in fact we don't know and will have to wait for the inquest conducted by the (apparently) unbiased IPCC. We do know the police can be trigger happy on occasions and have "accidentally" shot dead innocent men. Harry Stanley and Jean Charles de-Menezes spring readily to mind. You're also right about the banks. I daren't use all the adjectives I'd like to use about them, because Chris would probably (and rightly) ban me. The current austerity is down totally to their greed and profligacy. Nothing to do with Tony Blair or Gordon Brown, everything to do with them. They are the reason the rest of us are suffering from a decreased standard of living, and seeing our incomes squeezed. What's more, as I said a week or two back, not a single word about them paying back what they've shafted the public purse for. I would so like to put Cameron on the spot over the banks and what they owe the British people. As far as I can tell, those who have paid into the state second pension and its predecessor, SERPS, will not lose out on what they have contributed ~ so they could still end up with quite a bit more than £140 per week. The real winners will be those who are already in a solid occupational pension, who have been contracted out, and who are set to reach state pension age after 2016. They will cream their works pension, and the full £140 per week in one go, having paid nothing into the increase. The ultimate winners will be guys born in most of 1951, all of 1952 and the greater part of 1953, who will be the last to benefit from drawing their (noe enhanced) state pension at age 65. I know about this because I'm currently engaged in a project about it at work. This is organising a pre-retirement course for older workers. Not sure why they've given it to me, but although slightly incredulous at first, I've actually found the entire subject, extremely interesting and productive of a lot of useful knowledge. Useful link here

Welcome to the forum, Mongo, and good luck with your collection which is obviously now in its incipient stages. It's difficult for me to add to the wealth of excellent replies you've already received. Suffice it to say that the level of knowledge here is absolutely outstanding, and we all specialise in different areas. I've collected pennies, shillings and brass threepences. I've got all pennies for every year from 1860 to 1967, except for the 1869. As others have already said, it is best if you can aim for the best grade possible on every occasion. Although more expensive, if you are to be a serious collector, you won't regret it in the end. Of course, many start as casual collectors ~ I did myself ~ and become much more serious in the fullness of time. It's then you start wanting to upgrade the stock you have. Eventually, though, you do reach a point where you are totally happy with specimens from certain years, even if there are better ones available. There's just something about some coins which you really take to, and you would not exchange those coins for anything else. Anyway, all the best, and never hesitate to ask for advice should you need it. Somebody will always be able to help you

Nope, made a bid a couple of weeks ago but have heard nothing, could you let me know if/when you do? Will do ~ and vice versa, hopefully. I had a card put through the letterbox yesterday saying a parcel needed collecting from the post office with a fee to pay. I sent the wife hot footing down there to collect it as I couldn't think what it could be. It turned out to be their catalogue with no postage on it. Don't mind getting a free copy but don't expect to have to pay £2.40 for it. Bit of a cheek. Probably an oversight on their part, but even so..

Nope, made a bid a couple of weeks ago but have heard nothing, could you let me know if/when you do? Will do ~ and vice versa, hopefully. I have just received email confirmation of my bid ... ....and me, right on cue...

Nope, made a bid a couple of weeks ago but have heard nothing, could you let me know if/when you do? Will do ~ and vice versa, hopefully.

Anybody else made a bid on anything AND received an acknowledgement ? I haven't yet had anything for my two bids, but I did get an e mail receipt when my e mail was read, as I track them.

Assange On a forum that I frequent, religious type threads usually degenerate into slnging matches as well. The harshest invective generally stems from atheists towards believers. Wow. What do they sing? Would that they would confine themselves just to the art of song Yes, I find the same. Which is odd, I'd have thought fundamentalists would crawl out of their strait-jackets and join in, but perhaps I frequent the wrong forums! Slanging !!! Personally, I find it difficult to understand. As far as I'm concerned, religion is a matter for the individual. Just so long as they don't try and inflict their beliefs on me, they can believe in what God they like. I don't care. The expenditure of emotional energy that goes into some of these debates is unreal.

Assange On a forum that I frequent, religious type threads usually degenerate into slnging matches as well. The harshest invective generally stems from atheists towards believers.

Not good, to be honest. Despite his instant success, I think the job will go to someone else. Of course, it's interesting that two interim managers have taken Chelsea to FA and European Cup finals. The first, Avram Grant in 2008, lost both. The second, Roberto Di-Matteo, won both. Whether he was lucky and Grant was unlucky, is open to debate. Fitting end for Drogba's career there. Scoring the equalising goal and winning penalty in the Champion's League final. That's what I call leaving on a high.

Even so, I've yet to see one in my change. And I never ever found a 1951 penny in mine! But had NO difficulty at all getting one for my collection, from a dealer. When they're still in circulation, most of the fun is finding one in your change. I never had that chance with pre-decimal. This one, and the £2 coins are my only possibilities to emulate that scenario. Even then a pale imitation of what you had on offer before decimalisation

Circulated ones are rare in UNC !!! Both are very important, but English carries more immediate cache than maths, to be honest. My personal hate is "could of", "should of", "would of", instead of "have". Also the possessive "it's" with an apostrophe. Not to mention those who write/type endlessly, without commas and full stops. So their sentence makes no sense. Talking of "there", don't confuse with "their" or "they're" Nor " your" with "you're". As an example, look at the difference between "your shit" and "you're shit". Both mean entirely different things. Even so, I've yet to see one in my change.

The rarest coin currently IN general circulation, and issued FOR general circulation, surely has to be the 2009 Kew Gardens 50p, the mintage for which is 210,000. mintages