You might agree that what we are transacting for, is in the end, energy for us individually, assuming you mean we are the rational agents (Not sure I'd even say we were rational!). We have to use money to get at least the energy we each need to metabolise (The money to eat). The point is transactional behaviour has to change, if necessary to get the energy from a different source than we are accustomed to getting it from as profit, if the energy by profit is no longer available. We have to change, to accept the energy in money, donated in the same way the energy was, but as long as we receive far more than we need, we will pass on what we don't need, to people and causes we believe in.

This was already demonstrated during covid stimulus, and it stacks up with the scientific free energy principle, which just says that the base motivation of any and all living things is to minimise uncertainty of its own energy supply. If it doesn't reduce security of energy supply, then we will be more than happy to pass on what we don't need to others. We did this in markets during covid stimulus, and we might recognise that was a form of democracy, the market was democratised. It's only in a zero sum scenario we might feel we have to hoard, rather that vote for / allocate to others, even if its at cost to others.

I don't see this as trying to second guess or reinvent established economic theory, it's just simple analysis of stakeholder motivations.

All we are doing, is converting money to energy in all circumstances, and working out how people's behaviour will change under that circumstance. Notice also its how plants work after they formed leaves, nutrients always were their way of abstracting energy. Ours is money. When the energy flow changes direction, from negative to positive, all cells in the plant have to be kept supplied with energy, both when the energy flow is negative before leaves form, and positive after the leaves form.

We are negotiating a similar change of polarity of energy flow. The motor has to learn to work in the reverse of how it worked before. People in the future will be paid first, and then work afterwards if they want to.

Whereas in known history until now the work has had to be done first, and then paid (if the employer even wants to pay!)