And that's all well and good but say you are a wheat farmer and you want a rake, and nobody in the vicinity wishes to trade a rake for wheat, then what do you expect to do without money? The 'big picture' arguments ignore the fact that if I want to tend my smallhold and make enough wheat to survive, I need a new rake, all else is secondary.
We can question the origins of money as much as you like, all that matters is it's utility, and I would love to see a practical alternative.
RE: The Story of Money: The Myth of Barter