> For individuals, the only thing we have in this world is time, and it's finite. When it's all gone, it's all over for us. That means time is the most valuable

> For individuals, the only thing we have in this world is time, and it's finite. When it's all gone, it's all over for us. That means time is the most valuable thing possible to individuals. But this is a difference in degree, not kind. When the average individual buys something online, some individuals may choose to pay a little more for expedited shipping. It's the same principle. More abstractly, if I were to pose an individual looking to purchase Nike shoes 2 options: $100 to get the shoes today, or $1 to get the same shoes a year from now, the majority of individuals would choose the former, rather than the latter. Again, that's because of the time-value of money. Now, you're correct that not everybody has the means to be able to buy time like this, but one can't conclude from this reality that time is "more valuable than" money. > Time is what we all want, because sooner or later it runs out. Yes, this is correct, and it reinforces the argument that time and money are just two currencies that are interchangeable. Money is just a proxy for value, and time is undeniably valuable. Not everybody has enough money to buy 70+ years of "free time", which is why the median person typically trades labor instead of money for future "free time" (retirement). In most countries that offer social security, that's the underlying mechanism: convert mass labor into money (taxes/contribution) which can then be converted into long term investment (sovereign wealth funds, SS trust funds), which is then converted to equally distributed "future free time" for everyone involved.