In a system where one individual is working for other
In a way that he will also be benefitted from the other person working for him. Such a modification will induce motivation among humans in each sphere of human activity. And in such a way importance of work of every individual will be highlighted and no one would remain marginalised.
In a fully operational Natural Law Resource-Based Economy (N.L.R.B.E.) -- Goods & service production and distribution systems will be holistic and fully integrated into the global civilization.
A very good analogy to this would be to think of the human body. All systems to extract/synthesis energy/nutrients/etc are all fully integrated into the system. Just as the circulatory system can transport gases/minerals and nutrients to all cells of the body. If there is damage to the system, the circulatory and lymphatic systems quickly respond and act accordingly.
----------> would it be appropriate to ask the question: What will be the medium of transactions in an organism without money ----- see how this just doesn't make sense. Organisms bodies are fully integrated, holistic systems --> just as the earth is.
The N.L.R.B.E. Would operate in the same manner. Most good & service production will be fully cybernated, as well as all transportation systems. Energy sources, recycling, delivery systems, etc will all be fully integrated as parts of the whole system. This would allow access resource abundance.
If you need a good or service, a person could communicate their needs via the communication networks (which are all fully integrated with goods/service production, transportation, and indeed ALL systems) and the system itself would calculate and orchestrate the best means currently available (based on location, and all known factors) to meet those needs in best way possible known to mankind at that point in time (most sustainable, best materials, best design, proximity to user, etc.)
Check out The Venus Project, to understand more about the new system. They are working currently on the new cities, future education and distribute the concept to all people around the world.
A better alternative to money is no money. In Star Trek humans do not have money, people just work to better mankind rather than them self. Obviously you'd need to make people's lives better first but that is easy, a lot of crimes like rape can be solved. Then because there is no money there will be no prostitutes, no getting away with stealing - so no theft, no gambling or debt, no drugs and so on.
Currency is an embodiment of favours and services. It binds humanity to work together towards common goals. However, it's said that "money enslaves us", "money corrupts us" and "money is the root of all evil". It is true that the excistence of currency divides wealth unevenly among populations and nations. Could there be a better alternative? Although not possible in the current situation of politics, I think there could. A perfectly-built communism would not allow for the corruption. Currency that can bring injustice into the world is not a permanent solution to distributing wealth. However, going from capitalism to working communism is hundreds of years away.
Money is built on the basic principle of exchange. Anyone advocating no money clearly doesn't understand that human nature will eventually result in violence, just like in the days of Rome. Barter? No. Beat their heads in with maces? Now that's more like it! Thanks, but no thanks. As for trade, money is simply more effective. Perfect communism is not really possible, as some people will eventually stockpile goods, become more successful, form an alliance, etc. No money will create more theft and crime than having money, as it will be much harder to become successful. Why do you think people steal, for fun? Money is not the root of all evil, it in fact prevents evil.
I am not sure what the question is asking exactly, but I will try to answer. There is no alternative to money. There are alternative forms of money, but the concept of money will always remain. Money is a universal good. It is something that society recognizes as something that they can trade to anyone. It is something that has value in and of itself and one can be sure that if he receives it for a good, he can trade it to someone else for a good. Without money, we would be back to a bartering society. The problem with barter is that your cow that you have to trade might be worth nothing to me.
No, because whatever you use as an alternative medium of exchange is then money, coffee becomes money once you use it as a medium of exchange, it's like asking "is there an alternative brand of air aside from air, no because that would be air therefor the same, there is no kind of money that is not money, that is contradictory.
Is there really a better way to represent resources and values? Of course, we can't just use the resources as that would be a waste of them - which is why we have money, which is a stand in for the actual goods. McMount states that the existence of currency divides wealth unevenly, but that's not money's fault, but rather people's psychology that needs changing. To fault money is naive as it is an inherent idea that is prevalent in each and every one of us.