How does someone's posession of money allow them to buy an apple? Perhaps more importantly, how does it allow someone to plant an apple tree?
As I was pointing out, the value of money in relation to itself causes the overall value of a single dollar to be extremely inconsistent. For every dollar added, everyone dollar now holds a smaller portion of the gloabl monetary value for itself, so one dollar becomes less valuable. You've basically admitted that to be true.
Now, if the aquisition or production of goods is achieved through money, a problem occurs. The material wealth becomes subject to the inconsistencies of abstraction and subjectivity. The stock market is one of the worst examples of this. The productivity of a country can be absolutely gutted by a rapid trend of subjective speculation. But it's very silly too, because the value of money unto itself is the first thing to consider. As long you are using money as the means, it must be considered before all other factors, even supply and demand regarding other goods. I'm talking about something equivalent to the supply and demand of money itself, which is a zero-sum game. Everything that's built on a zero-sum game will be effectively be a zero-sum game too. It's like building a house on a swampy foundation.
It is problematic that you can never outline an objective proportion of monetary value in relation to material value. There is no objectivity to determining how many dollars and apple is allegedly worth. It calls into question how much monetary value actually has to do with material value.
Of course, I could always just bypass money altogether. I could find some apple seeds, plant it in my yard and nurture it. I just made material wealth without using monetary wealth. If I give the apples away, then people will be gaining material wealth without spending monetary wealth, from someone who himself did not spend monetary wealth. If something like was attempted en masse, it would probably destroy the economy, because the economy has become so monetarist.
So it's sort of lose/lose. I subject everything to money, then I subject everything to money's zero-sum game. If I don't subject everything to money, then every economic plan and theory that has been built around this monetary system is dead.
It was incorrect when I said that wealth cannot be created. I should have said that material wealth can only be a product of material wealth.
Material wealth can never literally, objectivelym or practically be the product of monetary wealth, and because of how money works, even monetary wealth can no be increased through monetary wealth.
People that think money can make more money, at least with any REAL value, are basically proposing a perpetual energy machine.
I will point out that having the lowest share usually is the cause of poverty. Remember, there is no amount of money so great that you can't be given a small enough share to put you in poverty. The Gross World Product Per Capita is $10,000. That's a not a ton of money, but would be enough to mostly keep people out of poverty. But it goes without saying that it isn't even remotely even in its distribution. Poverty almost always exists because of inequality.