I’m pretty much in agreement. The point that needs to emphasized is that money is simply an accounting device, as a function of society. While I’ve been using fat as an example of how the body stores energy, it also gets stored as bone and muscle. Which might better analogize how wealth should be stored in society.

So while money might function like blood, there would have to be ways to graduate this value more seamlessly into social wealth, rather than just economic value. I think that seems to be where you are going.

A thought is that as businesses pay taxes into the community, they get some sort of social credit in return. Which would lesson the resistance to taxes. Various possibilities come to mind, though the current Chinese social credit system comes to mind and that seems to have negative connotations of social control. Though my idea would go the other way as well and give these taxpayers more control in the system they are paying into. Obviously it works this way currently, as “money talks,” but if it was better explored and instituted as an effective feedback mechanism, between public and private systems, then it wouldn’t have the same “under the table” implications.

Which also leads into a more philosophic debate about top down versus bottom up. We have this monotheistic society, based on a top down deity, but pluralistic form of government, such as democracy and republicanism, originated in pantheistic societies. Consequently when we went back to them, from top down monarchies and the “divine right of kings,” it required separation of church and state, which effectively amounts to a separation of culture and civics. Islam and sharia law is a good example of civil structures still based on this top down cultural order. So it would require a fairly profound change to go to a more dualistic, yin/yang understanding of society, as both the bottom up desires and energies propelling it, with the top down structural forms that are necessary to integrate it.

Of course, this is already reflected in the political dichotomy of liberal versus conservative, but it would require discussion of the actual dynamics, not just the subconscious tribalism.

Cheers,

John