# 2010 Standard Catalog of World Coins - 1901-2000 Krause...



## patnor1011 (Oct 14, 2009)

2010 Standard Catalog of World Coins - 1901-2000 ( Krause publications, 37th edition) 

Krause publications, 37 edition (June 19, 2009)| ISBN:0896898148 | English | PDF | pages 2256 | 409 Mb 
Standard Catalog of® World Coins offers extensive details to meet your needs whether you’re a seasoned collector or just starting out in the hobby. This one-of-a-kind coin book, delivers nearly 1 million up-to-date values, plus key elements including mintage figures, metallic composition, size, mint and privy marks, and historic background to help you to identify and assess 20th century coins from around the world.
*******************************************************************************************************************
links no longer active. whoever want to download that send me pm. thanks.


----------



## macfixer01 (Feb 20, 2010)

Thanks Patnor. I downloaded this pdf awhile back and I've found this book to be a great reference to modern gold coinage. however does anyone have a link for a Krause book containing pre-1901 coins? It would be great to have that also.

Thanks again,
macfixer01


----------



## Ian_B (Oct 25, 2010)

thanks for the book I used it a while ago, but recently I had to re install windows onto my machine so I lost everything. would it be possible to have link 2 and 3 re uploaded?

thanks a bunch

Ian


----------



## Chumbawamba (Oct 25, 2010)

I find it interesting that some postings get culled for suggesting people don't pay taxes for which there is no liability, yet rampant copyright abuse is apparently over-looked and tolerated here.

Not that I mind: I find the references as useful as the next guy. But the double-standard is a bit "amusing".


----------



## Ian_B (Oct 25, 2010)

I actually really do own this book but its nice to have a reference on the computer I use while scouring ebay. much easier then flipping through the pages sometimes. the main reason also being that the CD digital copy that my book was supposed to come with on the back page is missing.


----------



## patnor1011 (Oct 25, 2010)

Those original links were not valid due to inactivity. Not enough downloads I guess? Never mind I know where is full .pdf for download 
http://hotfile.com/dl/78334647/83e8eb3/1901-2000__2010_Standard_Catalog_of_World_Coins__37th_Edition_-_digital.pdf.html


----------



## Harold_V (Oct 26, 2010)

Chumbawamba said:


> I find it interesting that some postings get culled for suggesting people don't pay taxes for which there is no liability, yet rampant copyright abuse is apparently over-looked and tolerated here.
> 
> Not that I mind: I find the references as useful as the next guy. But the double-standard is a bit "amusing".


What's amusing is your short sighted approach to tax evasion. Having read a great deal of your diatribe, I've concluded that you are much like an ex friend, a guy I grew up with. He was, like you, sure as hell that taxes were not a legal obligation. He was stupid enough to present his logic to IRS, who, for years, humored the guy. 

So you'll understand the importance of this message, understand that he had purchased, many years ago, a parcel of land that adjoins I-5 in Washington State. Ten acres, heavily wooded with Douglas Fir trees, along with a large number of hemlocks and interlaced with alders. The purchase was made when the property had little value, well outside a developed city, very unlike now. 

This ex friend, named Bird, took it upon himself to attend meetings with IRS, recorder in hand, to insure that he could entrap them with their illegal directives. Each time there was to be a meeting, it was called off due to his belligerence and his insistence that he record everything that was said. They played the game with him for several years, until they got tired of him and his stupidity. 

Late in the 1980's I received a phone call from Bird. He wanted to know if I could "loan" him $26,000, which he owed in back taxes. They had foreclosed on his ten acres, which they would have taken had he not come up with the money. I was unable (and unwilling) to help him, for he had created a nightmare with his stupidity in thinking that he could outwit the IRS, shifting his tax obligation to those that pay, even under protest. 

My logic is that the IRS is not about to allow anyone to do so, even at the expense of violating personal rights. It isn't a matter of what's legal, and what's not--it's a matter of them demanding taxes, and you're going to pay, one way or another. It's clear that if an individual were to prevail that IRS would then be looked upon as a toothless tiger, which they are not about to allow to happen. 

Long story short, this individual came within a fraction of an inch of losing a piece of property that is now worth at least $1,000,000, because he thought that paying taxes wasn't a requirement. 

I've mentioned to you that there will be no further discussion of tax evasion on this forum. _*I damned well mean it. *_ The next time you open your mouth in that regard, consider yourself no longer a welcome member here. Can you not see that anything you say that draws attention to the forum can result in the entire forum being scrutinized by those in power? Feel as you may about the obligations we all face, but don't wave that red flag in front of the bull on this forum. For a person that thinks he's so damned clever, right now you look like a moron to me. Get a clue, and get it fast. 

Harold


----------



## Chumbawamba (Oct 26, 2010)

Harold_V said:


> What's amusing is your short sighted approach to tax evasion.



Blah blah long anecdotal diatribe snipped so as not to re-dull the senses. Now I am being accused of tax evasion. On what, dear old Harold, do you base this accusation? In fact, I find no similarities between your friend, Bird, and my situation. Perhaps you have some insight into my own life (which I have not really discussed in any particular detail here) that I simply do not. It might be that you have super-humanly empathic powers that can traverse both time and space and ultimately know a person's story as if it were your own, so who am I to second guess you? Why, in fact, you may well be Almighty.



> I've mentioned to you that there will be no further discussion of tax evasion on this forum. _*I damned well mean it. *_



_*Fine.*_ Suits me just _*fine.*_ I'm not sure how there could be _*further*_ discussion of such topic when there never was any to begin with. I'm really here to discuss gold refining anyway.



> The next time you open your mouth in that regard, consider yourself no longer a welcome member here.



Excuse me? By whom? You? You and whom? Do you speak for all the members of the GRF? Do you speak for all the moderators? Do you speak for Noxx? Are you going to ban me simply because I point out the hypocrisy of your constant interference in my conversations, then get uppity when you single me out over a _*non-existent conversation*_?



> Can you not see that anything you say that draws attention to the forum can result in the entire forum being scrutinized by those in power?



And the rampant copyright abuse that I pointed out that clearly and regularly occurs on the forum is _*not*_ going to attract "those in power"? Please! That poses much more of a threat than my (non-existent) "discussion of tax evasion". And, anyway, nobody is going to bother themselves with our little forum in the corner of the web over here over simple sharing of links, so please don't use specious reasons to gag my random and inconsequential tirades about the corrupt tax system in this country.

Harold, I like and respect you, even though you're a curmudgeonly bastard, but this bullying has got to stop. Because that's all this is about: you are pushing your weight around just to prove you're the alpha dog. If you reasonably objected to my comment to the kid then you should have just quietly deleted it and noted to me in private mail what you did and why (as you have in the past). You know I've always been reasonable about it and respected your authority, even when you quietly deleted comments that I didn't make a fuss over (remember the one about Arizona? I WAS BEING WRY).

I used to be a top dog on a forum in one of my other hobbies, by way of being the equivalent of the Harold of that hobby. I had authority by way of being one of the most prolific collectors and investigators of the subject matter of that hobby. So I had clout and I expressed it. But my Alpha desire came from my young, unkempt cockiness. I was a topic nazi on the mailing list. If anyone strayed, I slapped their wrist! If they objected, I KICKED THEIR ASS. I took no damn prisoners and I was not to be told how a mailing list about Said Hobby was going to be allowed to stray into off topic material. If you wanted to jibber jabber then go to any one of the multitudinous places on the internet where you can jaw away about anything to your heart's content but NOT HERE. Pretty soon the entire discussion turned to discussing the controversy, then discussing the discussion, then chaos, and finally a blow-up, to be followed by an uneasy truce. And guess what? My insistence for the sake of insisting _lost me friends_. Over time I mellowed. The controversy repeatedly erupted, same issue, same arguments, same suggested solutions, every time. I just began to ignore it. Eventually, due to other obligations, I left the mailing list. And you know? That list goes on today, for better or worse, same controversy occasionally erupting, but everyone gets on and the hobby is better for it. My lack of Alpha presence notwithstanding.

Why the long story? Two good points to make from it: One, the GRF will do just fine without you, Harold. You can let go. I'm not suggestion _you_ leave, I'm just asking you to chill. You're too old and retired to get worked up over such nonsense! A slight bump here and there is fine; a good nudge for the stubborn and a sound drubbing for the repeat and overt offenders is acceptable but please, enough of the acid. Neutralize it. And Two, the GRF is not a mailing list. The latter is different in that you by default receive every message posted to the list, and so if a bunch of off-topic blather enters into the datastream then you have to wade through the chaff to get to the seed. The GRF is entirely different. It's a web forum. Most of the content is selected by the individual reader, base by base, topic by topic, thread by thread, comment by comment. If they don't like the crosstalk and noise? No problem, just skip that nonsense. No one is going to suffer from the occasional topic drift and folks, for the most part, have been respectful of others here and have kept their chatty banter to the proper forums. THERE IS NO PROBLEM.

Harold, I don't presume to say you are dispensable here, as obviously you are an important and *highly* respected contributor. However, I do not appreciate and I reject your presumption that everyone on this forum would find *my* contributions to be unwelcome if *you* said so. I try to contribute as much as I take from this forum and I can dare say I've put as much time into creating content to return to the forum in good faith for as much as I've consumed in the hours that I've sat and read everyone else's contribution.

I AM NOT A DEADBEAT.

Yes, I'll admit I have rather "unorthodox" views about our world, our society, the reality thereof and the obligations and expectations of one unto that society, but I am not "short sighted", "stupid" nor "a moron". I have very reasoned and well thought-out arguments that are as much a part of my daily discourse as yours is when you wax about something off-hand in a thread, and no one objects to it. Because they shouldn't: it's just banter. You object to my asides because they may be easily "gray", certainly (to your eyes) on the "extreme", but I never do or say anything "actionable" because I am not "inciting"; I am merely discussing a conclusion arrived at logically by a set of values that supercedes meek obedience to corrupt authority (or rather *any* authority that is not derived from one's own values, or *consent* to a collective set of values).

I would have preferred to have sent this privately and mulled over it but then I reckoned that since you publicly flailed me then I should rightly have the option to publicly rebuke you, and so here it is. I don't care to continue this already ridiculous discussion and I hope there is no need to do so (at least publicly) after this but I also hope that my silly and inconsequential comments will not be taken as anything but the noise in between the signal. If I'm out of line then I'll be the first to admit it, but I don't think that's the case here. I think this is an over-reaction, and I've seen it before. I've seen you jump down the throats of other people who have irked you in some otherwise simple manner. I've seen you obliterate threads that got even remotely "hot" and then just told everyone to shut up or you'd start buttin' heads! It's excessive, Harold. You don't need to be such a damn pitbull!

You may be my senior in terms of years and my better in terms of skills with regards to this subject but I am your EQUAL when it comes to respect, and I will not be treated with anything less than what I have given to you.

For what it's worth, I would really like to remain as a valued member, but if what I've said makes me an "unwelcome" member then so be it. I'll find my fortune on my own.


----------



## Harold_V (Oct 27, 2010)

My comments were based on a complaint I received from one of the readers. You obviously are not pleasing everyone with your diatribe. 

Like it or not, you are a guest here, in the house of the owner. The owner has made decisions about who will represent him and his best interest in his absence as he pursues his education. To that end, it is my responsibility to look after this forum, which I do as if it were my own. 

You have two options. You can behave as you are expected to behave, and you will restrict your comments to the subject at hand, that of refining precious metals. Your second option is to leave the forum. 

I'm going to give you two weeks to give this some thought. 

Harold

Edit:

Since the two week banishment imposed, I have received this comment from a reader:


> If comments like that were allowed, it would not surprise me in the least to have the forums membership taken as a group and selected for IRS audits, a hassle no one needs no matter how honest their books are. Who knows, perhaps even individual visits by the EPA would come to the membership. As a group we have the responsibility of portraying ourselves to the public as responsible law abiding individuals and showing that we guide new members towards such behavior. Anything less and we would deserve special attention by the authorities.



It is important for readers to understand that we must portray outselves (and to behave) as responsible citizens. Otherwise, we are subject to intervention by those that can make our lives far less comfortable.


----------

