There is something very wrong with the logic of this article. The author claims that people rational people only value money because it allows them to consume.

There is something very wrong with the logic of this article. The author claims that people rational people only value money because it allows them to consume. But that graph shows income vs consumption in a given time period. But whatever is left over, will be consumed in the future, which people also value (and if they didn't, it would be irrational to save any money in the first place!) They key error is in the phrase >I propose that utility is a monotonic function of spending - this means that people prefer to increase the amount of goods and services they consume. A green piece of paper doesn’t make me very happy, but the burrito I trade it for does. This is in itself true, but again, money allows you to consume in the future, if you don't spend it. A more relevant graph would be income vs post tax/welfare income. But that is a different matter.