>Not ants, rather societies that can agree on long term, as opposed to short term, economic goals and modify them easily when needed. Most individual humans aren’t able to do this. A society able to achieve it would be truly remarkable.

The fact that it is considered remarkable is absurd. From the perspective of a money system that rewards short term thinking it is easy to fall into the trap of believing that short term thinking is natural. You can also build a money system that rewards long term thinking and then short term thinking becomes remarkable.

You can call it an activity trap if you want. What I think is remarkable that there is this idea of "the" free market. There is no such thing. As soon as you mandate any monetary system its properties will permeate throughout the entire market.

Consider Say's law. It assumes people do not keep money over the long term and always spend everything they earn. In other words, general gluts and the recessions they cause, are impossible. He simply assumed the properties of money away and treated money equivalent to barter. This alone is enough to blame money. One could now construct a huge barter exchange and solve all money related problems by getting rid of it. Alternatively one could merely do away with the ability to keep money over the long term and force everyone to spend everything they earn. Another extreme proposal but it would work. People will argue, hey but there are lots of debtors promising to pay later so holding onto money will help them do investments. So banks do fulfill an important role and they do offer a reason why people shouldn't spend their money or rather, why they should be allowed to keep it. But then people forget that it is the debtors who are the ones providing the ability to accumulate money. People want savings to drive investments when in reality it is investments that should drive savings.

The former position creates the illusion that raising interest rates will drive more investments. It also gives an excuse to always demand at least 0% interest on their unspent money. The latter position shatters that illusion. Rather than letting interest rates be determined by fantasies, the providers of that interest rate have to exist. It means that 0% interest isn't a magic number but rather a distortion of the free market and that is why I have no sympathy for those who cry about inflation. The fact that it is possible to hold onto non degrading money in a world that is degrading all the time is absurd.

It's why the deflation money story (gold standard or Bitcoin) is so ridiculous. Money goes up in value, therefore you receive your most valuable income when you are young. Possibly enough to retire by 40. The incentives are clear, earn as much money as quickly as possible, no matter the long term damage. Who cares about reality when the value of your money is going up? Yet the outcome is obvious, reality catches up, your money will be worthless. The boom is followed by a bust, ahem, because the value of that money didn't follow the fundamentals it was based on, a degrading world. Short term thinking was built into money itself.

If your money system accounts for degradation of the real world, it will reward people to minimize degradation rather than earn money in a way that accelerates degradation and then use money to extract a growing share out of the degrading world. The idea that you can exist independently of the real world if you have money is an "activity trap".