The Plain Truth is so Happy That You Have Been Enjoying Bob’s Broadcasts.
2000 years ago, a newscaster that we know of as Jesus Christ warned us about false Christianity. The warning was not against the devil but against false Christianity…about people who come in His name and deceive many.
The Real Reason They Took Silver Out of Our Coins in 1964 (It Wasn’t a Shortage)
If you asked an American in 1964 why the dimes and quarters in their pocket felt different than the ones minted in 1965, they would likely repeat the story told to them by the nightly news: there was a coin shortage. The government’s official narrative was simple and seemingly logical. Coin collectors, vending machines, and a booming economy were supposedly absorbing small change faster than the Mint could produce it. To save commerce, President Lyndon B. Johnson introduced what he described as a practical solution: the Coinage Act of 1965.
This law replaced the 90 percent silver composition of dimes and quarters with a clad sandwich of copper and nickel — base metals with virtually no intrinsic value. It was presented as a logistical fix. But like many government narratives of the 1960s, critics argue it concealed a deeper economic problem. The United States was not running out of coins. It was running out of silver-backed money.
The real driver behind silver’s removal, according to this view, was Gresham’s Law: bad money drives out good. When two forms of currency circulate at the same face value but one contains valuable metal and the other is made of cheaper material, people hoard the valuable version and spend the inferior one. By the early 1960s, the United States was walking directly into this trap.
The dollar was effectively pegged to silver at $1.29 per ounce. As long as silver traded below that level, silver coins were worth more as currency than as metal. But industrial demand was surging — photography, electronics, and batteries were consuming increasing amounts of silver. As global prices rose, the U.S. Treasury faced a crisis. If silver exceeded roughly $1.38 per ounce, the metal in a quarter would be worth more than 25 cents. At that point, it would become profitable for citizens to melt down their coins.
To prevent this, the Treasury began selling its silver reserves to suppress the global price and defend the $1.29 peg. But the strategy was unsustainable. Millions of ounces were leaving U.S. vaults each week. Officials realized that if they did not sever the link between the dollar and silver, the nation’s strategic reserves would be exhausted.
When President Johnson signed the Coinage Act, he publicly dismissed fears of hoarding. Holding up the new copper-nickel coins — nicknamed “Johnson sandwiches” — he claimed there would be no profit in hoarding silver coins and that the Treasury had ample reserves to keep prices in line. In hindsight, that assurance proved short-lived. By 1968, the government abandoned the silver peg entirely, and silver prices rose sharply. Those who hoarded silver coins saw gains; those who trusted the official narrative saw their purchasing power decline.
The Coinage Act marked the final step in the dollar’s transition from metal-backed money to fiat currency. Prior to 1965, saving money could literally mean saving silver coins — a direct store of value immune to inflation. After 1965, the new clad coins offered no intrinsic protection. Critics argue this shift forced households into the financial system, relying on banks, bonds, and equities rather than tangible money.
The broader context was global. By maintaining a fixed silver price, the United States was effectively subsidizing industrial users and foreign buyers. Corporations and foreign governments could exchange dollars for underpriced silver. Speculators recognized the imbalance and took advantage. Treasury reserves that once exceeded two billion ounces fell sharply by the mid-1960s.
In 1968, the final deadline arrived for redeeming silver certificates for bullion. After June 24 of that year, the redemption promise ended. Paper certificates became fully fiat currency. In subsequent decades, silver prices fluctuated dramatically, peaking near $50 in 1980.
Critics argue that removing silver from circulation cleared the path for the high inflation of the 1970s. Without a metallic constraint, the Federal Reserve could expand the money supply more freely. Inflation surged, prices rose, and interest rates eventually climbed above 20 percent.
Internal Treasury communications from the era reportedly show concern about public reaction. Anti-hoarding campaigns were launched, and melting coins was eventually restricted. According to this perspective, the policy represented a transfer of wealth from ordinary coin holders to industrial and financial interests.
Today, some observers see parallels. The metal value of certain U.S. coins has occasionally approached or exceeded face value, raising concerns about negative seigniorage — when it costs more to produce a coin than it is worth. Historically, such situations have led to debasement of coinage, as occurred with the penny in 1982.
Pre-1965 “constitutional silver” coins remain in circulation among collectors and investors. Supporters view them as tangible stores of value with transactional utility. They argue that removing intrinsic value from money also paved the way for digital and cashless systems, culminating in discussions around central bank digital currencies.
At the same time, silver remains an industrially critical metal, used in solar panels, electronics, electric vehicles, and defense technologies. Some analysts predict supply constraints could drive prices higher in the future, though price forecasts remain speculative.
The broader lesson, according to critics of the 1965 policy, is that governments tend to default on metal backing when fiscal pressures intensify. They view the Coinage Act as a pivotal moment in the shift toward a fully fiat monetary system — one whose long-term effects continue to shape inflation, asset markets, and savings behavior today.