>The point is, money doesn't have intrinsic value. You can't eat money or use it to plow a field, nor can money babysit your children. It's just a token we've a

>The point is, money doesn't have intrinsic value. You can't eat money or use it to plow a field, nor can money babysit your children. It's just a token we've all agreed to accept in exchange for giving up things that do have intrinsic value. We are social animals, and our standing within the tribe is most certainly a resource to be extracted and utilized. How you utilize it is a different discussion, but influence and respect are undeniably parts of our software as human beings. Money is not a token we trade for things that have intrinsic value. We would have traded for these things before money was a thing, under a system of social credit. Everyone knows who's dependable and who sucks in the tribe, since you see and work with them everyday. Now that we're bigger than 200 tribe members, we need an abstraction to determine this: money. The author comes to this conclusion about 4/5 of the way down: >The money you've earned represents value you've contributed to society. I agree with the author throughout most of the article until this thought: >The point is, money spent on consumption is toxic — value-destroying. It's like, yeah, if I eat my cake then of course I can't have it too, but I needed the calories, and the tribe is better off that I had the energy and means to be productive. The whole of section V is just weird to me. It would be like saying 'metabolism is toxic'. I mean, I guess it can be? There are waste products, and there's also energy. It's just a nonsensical conclusion that we get to in an otherwise well-written article. >But as long as we're soul-searching, let's not forget to examine our spending habits as well. Yeah, 100% agree. Thought-provoking read overall.