Do you have to use tobacco as a good to stay alive?

Now... when something/one is trying to kill you, do you have to expend a bullet (or several) to stay alive?

Bullets are a manufactured good too, not a raw material. Resources were expended to create it. Tobacco, gold bullion, water... not so much.

It's like energy: You don't want to consume a significant amount of energy just to deliver some form of energy to where it's needed. It's why corn is such a poor choice for ethanol fuel production.

Do you have to use a bullet to stay alive? Do you have to use currency at all? We can argue these things all day if you want but your point can be easily reversed on itself.



Resources are expended to grow tobacco, refine gold, and purify water. Metallic alloys are manufactured and used in coins.

Currency was invented to expedite trade. If bullets are handy for that, what is there to stop someone from using them to trade with?

When a gun is between you and the thing trying to kill you.... yes. Unless you don't have a vested interest in living.

Tobacco use not only isn't needed to be consumed to stay alive, but has a detrimental effect on health. However, people get a rush off of it, and it's easier to get into a usable form than a bullet's raw materials, so it makes a good commodity.

And I'm not seeing how. See my point about manufacturing and energy.

What's stopping someone from using a different type of weapon to defend themselves? One for instance, that doesn't use bullets?

Ammunition, if you haven't noticed, is a valuable commodity in the Fallout universe. So why would it be so far-fetched for bullets to be used as currency?

As a side note: Currency is a manufactured good which usually consists of paper, metal, or fabric (The US dollar bill is mostly cotton fiber).

Detrimental to whose health? The owner of the bullet? Last I checked, that only happened when a gun was grossly misused.

Yes, bullets are a good with value. They are traded, they are bartered. But a bullet's ultimate purpose is to be shot out of a gun. It is meant to be expended. Money's purpose is to be given to someone possessing a good or service they possess in order for you to procure some for yourself. That money is no longer yours, but it is not expended.

A bullet may be more valuable to a hunter, ranger, or such than a guy on the Freeside street selling Ratkebabs. Money? A standard value to all parties involved. It is a fully liquid asset.

Sorry, I removed that part since it was irrelevant. Bullets can be detrimental to the user's health though... Look at any ammo box you can buy at a gun store. Bullets contain lead, which is poisonous.

So you agree that bullets are a commodity that is manufactured... You must also agree that currency is manufactured as well. So why is it such a leap to connect that commodities can be used as currency? In the Fallout wastelands, bullets are useful to anyone. Just look at how dangerous the world is. Bullets, given their effectiveness, would definitely be an extremely useful trading tool.

I should clarify. I'm arguing about considering bullets a currency in Fallout, not in the real world... I hope you see that.

Edit: I see you have the same habit as I do... Rabid editing of posts hehe

As I stated in my post, bullets get consumed. If you fire a bullet... does it still have value to anyone? Maybe the brass (which you could then use to make another bullet, which would be.... counterfeiting). Money? It is a medium of exchange.

You're not grasping the fact that bullets are expendable resources. Once you fire it, it's gone. Money still has value when it's "expended", as it still exists in a valuable state, just not in your possession anymore.

So are handloaders counterfeiters?

Bullets are direct commodites/goods/whatever. Money represents a commodity or good. It is a liquid asset.

The caps represent the water supply of the water caravans... because who wants to use water as a means of exchange? It's ungainly. So therefore an otherwise valueless object that is far more convenient to handle is attached to that commodity's value: the Bottlecap.

Also... as stated before, the potential hazard of bullets... would you want to trade with a money that contained explosives or had heavy metals?

Why should handloading be counterfeiting if bullets were a currency? A handloaded bullet is just as valuable (if not more) as a brand-spanking-new bullet. You aren't taking away the value of the item. The problem associated with counterfeiting is trying to misrepresent the value of something. So if the bullet you handload is just as useful as a "new" bullet, then what's the problem?

Money can be just as expendable as bullets... It's just that nobody uses money that way. You can use bottlecaps to make landmines in Fallout, so does that mean that bottlecaps aren't a good currency? You can use paper money to help start a fire in real life... That's an expendable use. Does that mean that paper money isn't a good currency? Does that mean that any item or substance you can use for an originally unintended purpose is a bad item or substance for use as currency?



Two words: Legion Denarius. That currency represents it's own value and is worth more per coin than the bottlecap and NCR dollar combined. Wouldn't you say that the Denarius is a more effective currency?

As for the danger of carrying dangerous items around... I would think that if people were that worried about carrying hazardous materials, they wouldn't carry dynamite or bullets in the first place. Hell, even some of the items we have today are dangerous in their own right. Like the cell phone (emits electromagnetic waves right next to your head when you use it), Amalgam fillings in your teeth (contains mercury), or lighters (flammable gas). If you rule things out because they might do something detrimental to your health, you aren't going to be left with much in your pockets.

:banghead:

Because improvised explosives are not the express purpose of money! Bullets are meant to be shot! Money is meant to be a medium of exchange!

Alice McLafferty herself expresses astonishment at the fact that people use what she and many others consider "money" as shrapnel in an improvised explosive. I imagine if you showed a legionnaire your supply of Coinshot, they'd have similar astonishment.

Money in and of itself is either valuless and given value by its association with a commodity, or is composed of the commodity it represents in a manner that really doesn't have any other (un-improvised) purpose. Bullets have the express purpose of being shot. A gold coin has the express purpose of being spent in exchange. What happens when you melt that gold coin? It becomes without value as a means of exchange unless you sell it to someone who deals in gold scrap... for (you guessed it) money.

Silly Putty
Superglue
Kevlar

All items designed for a purpose that were found to be useful in an originally unintended way.

Money made of precious materials gain their worth from the materials they are made of, not the other way around. If I showed up at a shop here in the town I live in with a gold coin and a lump of gold, I could use either to exchange for another item because gold is widely regarded as a valuable material. Items can be used for purposes both intended and unintended. If bullets were widely regarded as valuable then why would it be so unbelievable that someone could use them as a means of procuring goods and services (aside from robbing people that is).

Yeah... but none of them are money.

Which of these would consider a crate of bullets more valuable?

Julie Farkas, or Pacer?

Pacer, obviously. He's part of the Kings, and bullets are useful for putting down chemmed out thugs and pushing around undesirables. Far less useful to Julie, who is a healer first and foremost.

Now.... Which of them would find a bag full of bottlecaps more valuable?

Both would find equal value, because it is a liquid means of exchange, not a consumable good. Julie can use them to procure more medical supplies, and Pacer can use them to procure more bullets.

Now, Julie could barter those bullets. But to whom? Anyone? Nope, only those who would in turn have a use for them. That's the definition of bartering: exchange of goods or services without a monetary medium. She may get lucky and find someone with a cache of usable medical supplies, or she may just simply trade for.... bottlecaps.

The express purpose of money is a liquid means of exchange. The express purpose of a bullet is to be shot.

Talk to any of the Follower's guards... They'll tell you flat out that they need more armament.

And that completely misses the point. In that case, the bullets are a good. As in.... Not money.

You were trying to argue that bullets have less overall value to the Followers compared to The Kings and as a result, that bottlecaps are more valuable to the Followers. It turns out that bullets are just as valuable to the Followers as they are to The Kings, so they could in fact be used as a substitute for bottlecaps.

:banghead:

I said Julie Farkas, not the Followers.

I give up. You seem unwilling at all to see the difference between goods/services and money.

Julie Farkas is a member of the Followers. I see the difference between goods and services and money. I just don't see why there seems to be an impenetrable barrier separating those things.

Came back because I found a nice definition:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/barter

Exchanging bullets for stuff would be bartering. She would need to find someone who wanted bullets. Could she exchange bullets for Ratkebabs to that guy right outside the Mormon Fort? No, because A: he doesn't deal in weapons and B: he's got a Guns skill of 5. Bullets are useless to him, unless you use the gameplay contrivance of a simplistic economy system where he'll take them at the same (albiet Barter skill-modified) value as the Gun Runners... which will open a whole can of worms you don't want to open in this debate. And even then... those bullets are given a value in... money units.

You are confusing Bartering with using bullets as money.

So you agree that you can use items as a substitute for traditional money?

I'd like to point out that water is a consumable good. Gold is too if you consider electronics and jewelry. Really, the fact that something is consumable is irrelevant to it being a currency.

No one is saying bullets aren't meant to be shot, but they can have the alternate purpose of being currency. My MAIN ARGUMENT is that the fact they HAVE a use makes them a more logical currency. They're self backed!

Caps => backed by water
Coins => backed by gold
Dollars => backed by credit/reputation
Bullets => backed by usefulness

Suppose you came across someone in the wastes who never heard of the NCR or the water merchants or the Legion, which quite frankly should be common outside of the contrived scenarios we see in the games. Which would make a better small denomination for trade? They won't give a rats ass about the first three unless they want some jewelry or toilet paper (that's what I imagine old world currency to be valuable for lol). Bullets however, they know have value. Even if they're farmers in a safe community they can take those bullets and trade them to the next guy.

You could say that's just the barter system, but that's where the other benefits of bullets kick in: They're light, small, and durable. You can't carry around other goods for trade nearly as easily.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:


Bartering is in the absence of money. Bartering is entirely dependent on the value the other party in the exchange has for the goods/services you are offering. If they have no need for your offering or vice versa, there's no trade. If someone doesn't need Julie's bullets, then she can't trade. Julie could sell the bullets to the Gunrunners, get caps, and then buy medical goods from someone else. If there were no such thing as money, the Gunrunners have only bulelts and no medical supplies, so therefore no possibility of trade exists.

Okay, now I really will be out of here. My head hurts.

If someone doesn't recognize the value of your representative currency then it's useless too. Gold coins are great currency because they're inherently valuable. Bullets are inherently valuable even if you are able to use them in another way. So bullets can be used as a currency, just like gold coins.

It is funny that Bottle Caps have become the standard currency of the land. Knowing how and why does not change that.

Actually, it kind of makes it funnier.....

Besides, it gives us something to talk about. :grad:

Bartering is when you trade goods or services directly, for other goods or services without using a medium of exchange. That's the definition

Now bullets COULD be used as a currency, if it becomes the medium of exchange your no longer bartering. The problem is a bullets prime purpose is STILL to shoot someone. People are more comfortable with representative currency. They don't want to trade in a finished good they use. They want to trade in something that represents value. The idea of representative currency is around four thousand years old. So it makes perfect sense that wastelanders would gravitate towards a medium of exchange such as caps.

Five one dollar bills always equals one five dollar bills For bullets to truly be a currency it need a flat relative value to one another. Five 10mm bullets would always have to equal X number of .44. No matter where you went. Otherwise its bartering. You run into further stumbling blocks as an area populated by armored creatures would put a greater value on AP ammo, while an area with softer creatures like Cazadors and Bighorns would put a greater value on hallow points.

Shells would be a little better as a 10mm shell is the same be it from hollow point, armor piercing or hand loaded. But it still has the problem that it. The relative value of bullets can change depending on who your talking to. The relative value of a one dollar bill and a five dollar bill does not. Now energy ammo could be currency much more easily as its easier to turn electron charge packs into microfusion cells then it is to turn 9mm rounds into .50 caliber.

Remember folks then all the merchants will trade for basically any good. Caps may be the medium, but the followers still accept bullets as payment for meds. Because the barter system still exists. Civilization isn't established enough for a purely money system in the post apocalyptic world. But it is established enough that a medium of exchange is necessary for trade.

Or, that someone could recognize Julie's bullets as currency. Both Julie and the Gunrunners could buy medical supplies with bullets.

You're frustrated because your argument is one of semantics, which no one cares about. You fail to recognize what people are suggesting.

Dragon, Madcat I'd just like to say. I largely disagree with the both of you.