The problem I'm seeing is that nature is circular, while people are linear and goal oriented, so while markets need money to circulate, people see it as the signal, to extract and store.
Econ 101 might observe that money is both medium of exchange and store of value, but a medium is dynamic, while a store is static. Blood is a medium, fat is a store. Roads are a medium, parking lots are a store. While they might be connected, mixing them is not helpful.
Most money functions as a contract, where the asset is backed by a debt. Even gold backed currencies are only the receipt. So in order to store the asset, similar amounts of debt have to be generated.
For one thing, this creates a centripetal effect, as positive feedback draws the asset to the center, while negative feedback pushes the debt to the edges. To the extent money and finance serve as the value distribution and circualtion mechanism of the community, the effect is analogous to the heart telling the hands and feet they don't need so much blood and should work harder for what they do get.
The Ancients used debt jubilees to reset this process and one of Michael Hudson's recent books argues this was Jesus' original message, "Forgive them their debts." Which was turned into, "Forgive them their sins," as Christianity was co-opted by the Roman empire.
The other primary method seems to be having the government as debtor of last resort. Obviously the capital markets couldn't function, without the government borrowing up trillions in surplus investment money.
All the inept wars, with no one being accountable, seem to be designed to make it go away, so more can be borrowed. Though this is not a wise long term investment.
Frankly the whole system is looking more like a giant ponzi scheme.
Eventually we will have to come to terms with money and banking as the public utility enabling markets, not a commodity to mine from them.
Government was priate once, as well, but we figured out how to make "mob rule" work. At least better than the alternatives.
Yes? No?
