>> there will be two classes of people in such a scenario, those who scrounge for necessities and those who buy and sell gold.
There must also — and will also — be a third class of people in that scenario: those with the foresight to store *true* value in useful things, like for example land, tractors, fuel, biodiesel-making capability, antibiotics, roofing tools, ...
I’m not a big believer in a “WTSHTF” scenario, although I acknowledge that it *could* happen. But let’s assume it *does* happen. I envision a scenario like the following:
YOU: I’m hungry. I want to buy a chicken from you.
ME: “Buy”? What does that mean? There’s no such thing as money anymore.
YOU: Okay, sorry, I want to trade with you.
ME: What do you have to trade?
YOU: I’ll give you a tiny sliver of gold shaved off this coin.
ME: Ha ha ha ha ha. What good is that to me?
YOU: Then what do you want?
ME: I need a quart of lube oil and a fan belt for my tractor.
YOU: [blank look]
ME: OK, I’ll take pity on you. Give me that gold coin...
YOU: DUDE! I paid FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS for that coin!
ME: What’s a dollar?
... you get the picture.
How can he do this? Because there are many people who own chickens - each producing vastly more eggs and meat than they can possibly use themselves.
Of the thousand people who want to buy a chicken, 800 have Bernanke Clownbux, 100 have various retarded barter ideas and 100 have silver money. Which ones do you think are going to be the chicken farmer's favorite customers?
Don't forget: those people who own chickens have their own bills to pay - and their suppliers don't want to be paid in chickens. The paper money is losing 10% a day and fills a wheelbarrow. But silver and gold? They'll do nicely.
I think ammo would be used like small denomination bills, e.g., five .22LR for a loaf of bread.
I can see a lot of barter taking place.