The real irony is that we are so utterly clueless as to the nature of money. The assumption is that it is a commodity, but as a glorified voucher system, it is a contract. Basically between the individual and society.

Necessarily the asset, the value, is backed by a debt, an obligation. As such it makes an effective medium of exchange, but as a store of value, similar amounts of debt are required.

The fact is that Capitalism is not synonymous with a market economy, as markets need money to circulate, while people tend to see it as the signal to extract and store. Which requirese ever more to be added and ever more metastatic methods of storing what has been extracted.

For example, the capital markets couldn't function without the government siphoning up trillions in surplus money, yet no one seems to see that. The secret sauce of Capitalism is that public debt backs private wealth.

Also it is very useful to squeeze the money flowing through the regular economy, as this causes it to run on debt, drawing that saved money back into circulation.

The reality is that a medium and a store are not the same. One is dynamic, while the other is static. Blood is a medium, fat is a store. Roads are a medium, parking lots are a store. Yet Econ 101 teaches that money is a medium of exchange, store of value and price setting mechanism, though that is a function of being a medium.

The functionality of money is in its fungibility. We own it like we own the section of road we are using, or the air and water flowing through our bodies.

It is, by its very nature, a public utility and has to be treated as such.

Of course, the entire system is going about learning all this the hard way. Money is an economic lubricant, not a fuel and we are not going to print our way to prosperity. Value has to be saved in tangible assets, like strong communities and healthy environments, not just digits in an account. The idea of the public commons has to be reinvented.