On the shorts-sightedness of money and what those thoughts evolved to

 Money is the metric with which we measure value in modern society. There has been discussions about how good money is as a metric. I wonder if the key issue with money is that it is quite temporarily local by nature. It is easily seen that money is not capable of reflecting long term value. It is simply just to look at some examples. Scientific discoveries is one such class of events that are clearly not values correctly by money.

I have no clue how to replace money with some other metric. Perhaps is it impossible. It is at least likely hard to have a metric that can predict future value. This is to some extend done by money e.g. on the stock market.

It can be relevant to point out that money has not always been this metric. It has grown to be the metric for value estimation. Being based on a free market (or the idea there of), I think the idea is that having the collective set of humans willing to engage in valuing a resource (e.g. on the stock market, or the job market) do so will render the most accurate value or said resource.

Take another example of value metric; traditional feodal class. This is a metric that has much more limited scope - it can only be used to value human beings. And it is by construction quite granular, duke, lord, king, ... We cannot have a continuum of classes, that will be unmanageable. Feodal class does not inherently constitute a value - it has to be upheld by society (similarly to how we have to continue to believe in money). It is the metric of value. It has some properties the money does not have. It is tied to a person and cannot easily be transferred (except for by inheritance). But it generates a benefit to the holder by the common belief in a feodal society. You will get privileges by holding a certain title.

So, perhaps it would be interesting to look at what value metrics are available and see if some seem to work better than others. Money is clearly extremely successful. But perhaps does ti have some not so desirable properties. One such is that it, at least it seem so to me, does not correctly value many entities. The value can be too high or too low.

Perhaps a system of domain-specific currencies is a way forward? This might be highly impractical. But then one could have a situation where a certain currency is regulated in a certain manner. Say that you want to value a piece of art. Today, we can purchase a piece of art with the same money as we purchase food. However, there is a clear difference in value for the art piece and the food. We can certainly live without the art piece. However, we cannot live without the food. So, is it not strange that those two items can be valued using the same metric?

Or a currency that is hierarchical some how? There can be a certain value for food and another for art. So, if someone is willing to sell food the currency has a certain value but the value is completely different for art? Not clear what that means. Perhaps the currency is owned collectively. If A wishes to purchase food but B wishes to purchase art, A will have precedence since food is more basic?