> Some percentage of the cost of operating a state is therefore "work" done to back the currency's value.
No, this is perfectly reasonable and catastrophically, dangerously inverted. We do not operate a state to generate money. We use money to fund the operation of the state. Otherwise we create a perverse incentive attracting what would be parasitism, had we not just incompetently surrendered effective beneficial ownership of the resource to the first sufficiently convincing comer.
Say, for example, the Afrikaner failson of a gemstone magnate, who is regrettably good at cosplaying a foolish person's idea of a wise person.
No, this is perfectly reasonable and catastrophically, dangerously inverted. We do not operate a state to generate money. We use money to fund the operation of the state. Otherwise we create a perverse incentive attracting what would be parasitism, had we not just incompetently surrendered effective beneficial ownership of the resource to the first sufficiently convincing comer.
Say, for example, the Afrikaner failson of a gemstone magnate, who is regrettably good at cosplaying a foolish person's idea of a wise person.