Robert,
The way it seems to be, but I keep trying.
Money is a medium, like blood, or a road, or water in a convection cycle. When we treat it as property, then we seek to collect it, which means ever more must be added to keep commerce functioning and like a poor circulatory system, clots, tumors and high blood pressure result.
The basis of our currency is national debt and yet it gets derided as 'fiat currency,' but this amounts to a contract between the community and its participants. You don't collect contracts, you honor them. Since one of the primary needs of a circulatory system is to keep it flowing and the primary reason most people seek to accumulate money is for emergencies, old age and large expenditures, more flexible means of reciprocity would reduce this need. Conversely people who do hoard excessively, or otherwise abuse the system, would get penalized.
Quite simply we do not own money. We don't hold the copyright and are not responsible for its value. If people more broadly understood this, then they would realize that such things as a strong community and a healthy environment are viable stores of value that do provide for such needs as old age and emergency help, as well as general cooperation and not just sources to be mined in order to accumulate notational wealth.
As I point out, this is pie in the sky thinking now in our atomized society and quantified economy, but we will eventually have a monetary crisis that simply adding more credit to the system is not going to resolve and when that happens, we are going to have to do some soul searching and likely some serious rebuilding. It's just a pale blue dot, even for those with billions.
A lot of these ideas seem to be coming from the modern monetary theory folks, such as Michael Hudson, Ellen Brown and the public banking people, but I'm just putting up my own thoughts to add to the noise level on it.
Regards,
John M